Re: Consequence of using ld to link libraries on Solaris

[Gary V . Vaughan]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On 14 Apr 2004, at 18:55, Albert Chin wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2004 at 04:51:22PM +0100, Gary V.Vaughan wrote:
> > On 13 Apr 2004, at 15:46, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> > > On Tue, 13 Apr 2004, Gary V.Vaughan wrote:
> > > > > > So, to accommodate this, how about we use cc to create shared
> > > > > > libraries on Solaris?
> > > > >
> > > > > This problem is not specific to Solaris.  The same problem occurs 
> > > > > on
> > > > > Digital Unix, or any other OS where libtool doesn't currently use 
> > > > > the
> > > > > C compiler to link.
> > > >
> > > > Is there any technical reason why we need to use ld directly 
> > > > anymore?
> > >
> > > Since we mostly use the C++ compiler to do linking for the C++ tag, 
> > > it
> > > seems that there is no good reason that a similar approach can't be
> > > used for C.  When linking using the linker, the library dependencies
> > > are more assured, but we loose all the platform smarts which are
> > > included for free with the compiler.
> >
> > My thoughts exactly.  If no-one beats me to it, I'll try and look at
> > this next week.
>
> I already have it done for Solaris, HP-UX, Tru64 UNIX, and IRIX. My
> patch is for the 1.5 branch. I'll forward-port to the 1.6 branch and
> post the patch in a few days when I have time.

Okay, great.  Thanks :-)  This needs applying to branch-1-5 too, right?
I can't find it in the ChangeLog...

Cheers,
        Gary.
- --
Gary V. Vaughan      ())_.  address@hidden,gnu.org}
Research Scientist   ( '/   http://tkd.kicks-ass.net
GNU Hacker           / )=   http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool
Technical Author   `(_~)_   http://sources.redhat.com/autobook

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFAfF6wFRMICSmD1gYRAi6XAJ41mXBzQmMj5OYmg3/dTmdxepT84ACgzaFp
b4/rxkpAS3KY7EhZCwbfH8s=
=gNFo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----