Re: TODO

[Ralf Wildenhues]

* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 04:34:49PM CET:
> >Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> >>
> >>This solution does not seem to support the case where an actual
> >>dependency exists but is not registered in the library (because the
> >>user didn't supply it) so that the dynamic link loader doesn't know
> >>about it?
> 
> Good point.  We really ought to check the library registered
> dependencies against the .la deplibs and only drop the deplibs
> common to both, since we know the linker will pick those up.
> I guess that means looking through the dependency tree of .la
> files to find matches.

I don't think so.  If there is a real dependency, then we want it to be
noticed.  Look:

libA -> { libB, libC }
libB -> libC

Now libB is rewritten to not need libC any more (imagine it provides
low-level stuff like glib).  If we do not listen to what the user tells
us, we end up with a broken installed library libA.

> Also, what do we do about -rpath?  We still need to encode the
> runtime path to even the dropped deplib directories so that the
> same library we linked with is picked up at runtime.

Erm, is this not handled in the depending library? (I have no idea,
really, but I hoped this would be so.)

> >>If libone or libfour contain weak symbols, what happens?
> 
> I have no idea!  Scott?

Me neither.

Regards,
Ralf