Hi, Am Dienstag 21 Februar 2006 17:13 schrieb cedric: > I take a look at the help of pkg-config (pkg-config --help) > and there is the --static option for static linking, so I think --libs > assume you're linking dynamically with the lib.
Point.. But this is not dynamically linking. This is linking static. Regardless of --static or not. There's no shared libagg in Debian because the SONAME is broken (so.2 since some versions where the ABI *did* change, and the upstream author doesn't recommend using libagg.so.2 anway)..- > > be precise) IMHO. But I'll think of it. > > > > Why don't you just spcify -lagg_pic when you know it is needed? > > (Debian-only addition, though, -lagg_pic doesn't exixt upstream, it's > > built in Debian because I know it's needed on !i386, e.g. for OOo, but > > I already patched OOo to use -lagg_pic) > > This implies patching all (not that many at the moment...) packages that You need that now anyway, even when I do the change. Because if you use -lagg on Debian you get libagg.a. Which will fail on !i386 if you try to linkl it nto a shared lib because libagg.a isn't built with -fPIC. You'd need to patch those apps to use -lagg_pic anyway. -lagg does only work for complete static libs or appy which may link libagg statically into it. > link with libagg. And there is no more utility in a great tool like > pkg-config if it works on a limited number of arch and libs and you have to > patch your build system if you dont use the right ones. libagg_pic *is* the right one. Giving back -lagg *will* break stuff on !i386 ad there's no dynamic libagg but only libagg.a which is built without -fPIC. Regards, Rene -- .''`. René Engelhard -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer : :' : http://www.debian.org | http://people.debian.org/~rene/ `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | GnuPG-Key ID: 248AEB73 `- Fingerprint: 41FA F208 28D4 7CA5 19BB 7AD9 F859 90B0 248A EB73
