[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Portability of -no-undefined

From: Bob Friesenhahn
Subject: Re: Portability of -no-undefined
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:25:13 -0500 (CDT)

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Roger Leigh wrote:

Many Makefile.ams use logic like this:

   no_undefined = -no-undefined

   lib_LTLIBRARIES = libfoo
   libfoo_LDFLAGS = ... $(no_undefined)

This makes -no-undefined only get used when building DLLs on a Win32
platform.  However, if this were specified directly:

How odd!

   foo_LDFLAGS = -no-undefined

does this do anything on other platforms where it's not required?

I don't know the precise/complete answer to this, but I suspect that it can make a difference. I am pretty sure that some (all?) versions of AIX will want -no-undefined.

Please could anyone clarify exactly how -no-undefined should be used
when building shared libraries for a package that should build on all

Any package which is sufficiently developed/correct that it can use -no-undefined should use it for all targets. I have used it for all targets for many years without ill effects. Using -no-undefined means that a library's linkage must be complete and all dependencies are known.

Packages likely exist which have design problems in their libraries which prevent the use of -no-undefined.

Bob Friesenhahn

reply via email to

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