[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: libtool, Apache 2.0, AIX
From: |
Robert Boehne |
Subject: |
Re: libtool, Apache 2.0, AIX |
Date: |
Mon, 03 Dec 2001 09:43:28 -0600 |
Jeff Trawick wrote:
>
> Robert Boehne <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > In Libtool we allow for either to be built, the latter being
> > created when -Wl,-brtl is added to LDFLAGS during configure.
>
> From my perspective, I only get to choose we whether or not I do
> run-time linking... I don't get to choose what format shared
> object/library I get. And these are orthogonal issues.
>
> Since run-time linking is a set of behaviors that affects how the
> applications and libraries interact and no mere file storage/naming
> issue, it is clear that to run-time link or not to run-time link is
> the choice really being made. That's why I shudder when I am told
> that the way to get libtool to use pure libfoo.so on AIX is to simply
> add "-Wl,-brtl". It hides the fact that apps can start working
> differently.
>
> But I admit that I need to read all available doc on run-time linking
> and then go re-do the conversations I've had in the past with me
> better able to ask why run-time linking isn't the right thing.
Jeff:
I'm definitely amenable to making changes to libtool, but I would like
to understand why you get core dumps. I *thought* I understood shared
libs under AIX, and the only thing that prevents Libtool from doing
the "right thing" is that perhaps I don't. ;)
So if you would like to send me all the details off of the list
I would like to get to the bottom of this. IIRC, someone had proposed
using -brtl by default, but someone at IBM was vehemently opposed to it.
Thanks,
Robert
--
Robert Boehne Software Engineer
Ricardo Software Chicago Technical Center
TEL: (630)789-0003 x. 238
FAX: (630)789-0127
email: address@hidden
- Re: libtool, Apache 2.0, AIX,
Robert Boehne <=