On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 18:59:32 GMT, Jiangli Zhou <jian...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> After thinking a bit more on this, I concluded that we cannot automatically >> extract a proper set of ld flags from what's being passed to the individual >> libraries. The LDFLAGS needed by the monolithic static library needs to be >> explicitly defined. Unfortunately, most of it will be a copy of what is >> already duplicated across JVM_LDFLAGS, LDFLAGS_JDKLIB and LDFLAGS_JDKEXE. >> :-( But cleaning that mess upp requires a separate PR. > >> After thinking a bit more on this, I concluded that we cannot automatically >> extract a proper set of ld flags from what's being passed to the individual >> libraries. The LDFLAGS needed by the monolithic static library needs to be >> explicitly defined. Unfortunately, most of it will be a copy of what is >> already duplicated across JVM_LDFLAGS, LDFLAGS_JDKLIB and LDFLAGS_JDKEXE. >> :-( But cleaning that mess upp requires a separate PR. > > @magicus, just to make it clear, do you plan to explicitly define the set of > LDFLAGS for static linking as part of this PR? We need to make sure the > JVM_LDFLAGS is properly included initially. Yes, I just pushed a commit that does that. I have manually inspected the values and it looks sane, but I need to verify it on our CI system as well. The reasoning for us setting some of the ld flags are less than clear, so it is a bit hard to tell if they should be included or not. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20837#discussion_r1801804046
