libtool
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Building all static


From: Bob Friesenhahn
Subject: Re: Building all static
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 09:52:15 -0600 (CST)

On Tue, 2 Nov 2004, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:

This seems like a particularly bad idea to me.  What is the value of
changing existing documented libtool behavior?

Consistency, and user expectation.  Looking through the archives I see the
repeated question of why -static still links shared libraries for libtool,

There is also value to consistent operation of libtool flags across released versions.

not usually desirable to build a completely static program.  Completely
static programs don't necessarily work properly when copied to a
somewhat different processor type with the same OS, or a different
kernel version.

Hmmm... interesting.  So is this still the case if I build my program
without libtool, using cc/ld -static (which is basically what -all-static
currently does)?

Yes. Naturally, operation is highly OS/CPU dependent. Modern systems like Solaris provide exceedingly few true static programs. Under Solaris, ldd reveals that most programs pick up an extra shared library which provides some architecture-specific implementation.

I guess my argument boils down to this:

Unless most of our users who think they want -all-static actually want
(libtool's existing) -static, and as long as the use of the -static option
in libtool calls in released packages to mean what it currently does is
both deliberate and (at least a little) widespread: it makes more sense
for libtool to do what one would expect when passed the -static flag.

Are these assumptions good?

 i) people who specify -static to libtool don't want to link against
    any dynamic libraries, and are suprised that isn't actually the case.
ii) the -static option is not used to mean `link static libtool libraries,
    and dynamic otherwise' in many shipping packages.

 iii) The user expects existing libtool options to continue working as
      they have been documented for years.

In my opinion, the argument must be very strong in order to change an existing libtool option which has been documented for a long time and is likely in use.

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
address@hidden
http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen




reply via email to

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