[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Need more
Re: Need more
Fri, 13 Sep 2002 06:46:18 -0500
On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 12:31:34PM -0700, Howard Chu wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: address@hidden [mailto:address@hidden Behalf Of
> > The other request however, isn't feasable. Libtool needs to
> > create non-pic objects when linking static libs, pic objects when
> > linking shared libs. Libtool can't wait until link time to decide
> > to not link static libs, it has to know at configure time.
> > Anyway, what is the problem with what Libtool currently does?
> > Couldn't you either configure to not build static, or simply
> > ignore the static version?
> This is something I've requested and submitted patches for since at least 3
> years ago now. No, libtool does NOT need to know at configure time. You can
> configure libtool to produce both static and shared objects, then provide a
> runtime switch to turn one or the other off during compile and link. I don't
> understand why you insist on only allowing the selection at configure time.
> This is seriously inconvenient when building a mix of static and dynamic
> libraries in a single project, it pretty much requires us to configure two or
> more separate copies of libtool just to get the different combinations.
I agree. The default behavior should be left as-is and we can add a
switch to produce either the static and/or dynamic libs. Robert, do
you agree. If so, maybe we can get Howard to submit another patch for
the HEAD branch.
albert chin (address@hidden)
- Need more, Schleicher Ralph (LLI), 2002/09/12