[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: hardcode_minus_L on HP-UX 11.23/IA-64

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: hardcode_minus_L on HP-UX 11.23/IA-64
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 17:38:20 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.9i

Hi Albert,

* Albert Chin wrote on Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 04:09:03AM CET:
> >From ld(1) on HP-UX 11.23/IA-64:
>   +[no]defaultrpath
>        +defaultrpath is the default.  Include any paths
>        that are specified with -L in the embedded path,
>        unless you specify the +b option.  If you use +b,
>        only the path list specified by +b is in the
>        embedded path.
>        The +nodefaultrpath option removes all library
>        paths that were specified with the -L option from
>        the embedded path.  The linker searches the
>        library paths specified by the -L option at link
>        time.  At run time, the only library paths
>        searched are those specified by the environment
>        variables LD_LIBRARY_PATH and SHLIB_PATH, library
>        paths specified by the +b linker option, and
>        finally the default library paths.
> So, hardcode_minus_L=yes is incorrect on this platform if
> +nodefaultrpath is in LDFLAGS.

ACK.  Or when we put at least one +b in the command line.
Hmm, when creating a library, we use +b anyway.

Is it guaranteed that we already use -L for each directory in question
when creating a program?  Ie., there don't appear any +b, right?

> Should we set hardcode_minus_L=yes only
> when there is no +nodefaultrpath (similar to how we set
> aix_use_runtimelinking=yes when LDFLAGS has -brtl in it)?

Probably a good idea.  Do you have access to HP-UX 11 (how about 9, 10?)
to test?

> We should probably do this only when the compiler and linker driver
> are the same.

Erm, why?  Where does the compiler driver come into play here?


reply via email to

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