[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Making shared libraries (DLLs) on Windows: -no-undefined

From: John Brown
Subject: Re: Making shared libraries (DLLs) on Windows: -no-undefined
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 17:42:09 +0000 (UTC)
User-agent: Loom/3.14 (

Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf.Wildenhues <at>> writes:

> * John Brown wrote on Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 01:27:42PM CEST:

> It is how libtool currently works. Period.

I understand.

> There may be something to
> discuss whether this is the best imaginable solution, but not whether
> this is how it currently works.

As I said, I don't agree with the way it works, but you are the experts.

> > It looks like discrimination against users of the evil M$ O/S ,
> As long
> as I have done Libtool maintenance, more than a third of the work has
> been devoted to w32 systems alone.

I humbly apologize. It works, and it really helps the situation a lot. The only
other thing that I do not like is when it adds the '-<number>' suffix, but that
is another topic.

> Note that with some luck, you can just pass
>   -no-undefined
> to libtool on about any system.  At least with C, there should be few
> issues.  (Not so sure about C++.)

An excellent reason why a flag should not be necessary, but I yield.

> > Just for my information:
> > 
> > I gather that on Linux, you *can* create a shared library with
> > undefined symbols.
> Yes.

Running 'nm --undefined-only libamrnb-2.dll' gives:

         U ___crt_xc_end__
         U ___crt_xc_start__
         U ___crt_xi_end__
         U ___crt_xi_start__
         U ___crt_xl_start__
         U ___crt_xp_end__
         U ___crt_xp_start__
         U ___crt_xt_end__
         U ___crt_xt_start__
         U ___tls_end__
         U ___tls_start__
         U __end__

If undefined symbols are not allowed, then what's that?

reply via email to

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