[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Linking against indirect dependencies

From: Bob Friesenhahn
Subject: Re: Linking against indirect dependencies
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 09:44:44 -0500 (CDT)

On Mon, 24 May 2004, Albert Chin wrote:

Of course the correct answer is that not linking against indirect
dependencies is non-portable.  Certainly Microsoft Windows DLLs
require full linkage, and I believe/suspect that AIX does as well.

I don't see it that way. If a backend optimization can be done for a
specific platform, why not? If we lose nothing, I don't see why
libtool should not do it. The solution is still portable, as far as
libtool is concerned. Such a change wouldn't change any of the
cross-platform functionality libtool provides.

It is not an easy task to intuit which systems require the full linkage list and which will work properly with an abbreviated list. Even older Linux versions require the full linkage list (or several copies thereof!).

A further problem is that libtool doesn't reliably know if a static or shared library will be used by the system linker. If it guesses wrong and a static library is used, then everything breaks since static libraries don't support dependencies.

Bob Friesenhahn

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]