[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Portability of -no-undefined
From: |
Noah Misch |
Subject: |
Re: Portability of -no-undefined |
Date: |
Tue, 19 Oct 2004 21:42:43 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.6i |
On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 01:08:26PM +0900, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
> On at least Mac OS X libraries built with -no-undefined are different from
> those built without. Why should we not take advantage of any extra features
> offered by the toolchain/OS for libraries with no undefined symbols.
I overlooked that.
> Also testing for equivalence of libraries on Mac OS X is not going to work
> (unless you write a special test program) as libraries often contain a
> timestamp in the mach headers.
Scratch the idea, then. I do still wonder why -no-undefined libraries differ on
GNU/Linux.
Thanks for the corrections, Peter.