On Thursday 26 January 2006 19:48, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Thursday 26 January 2006 11:16, Paul de Vrieze wrote: > > On Thursday 26 January 2006 16:34, Mikey wrote: > > > And those instructions have nothing whatsoever to do with common sense > > > from a new, or even experienced users perspective. Knowing that a gcc > > > upgrade will break libtool is not common sense, nor is it commonly > > > known. > > > > It will not break libtool. > > it does and it doesnt > > /usr/bin/libtool hardcodes the paths to internal gcc files > > normally this isnt an issue as most packages now generate and use their own > copy of libtool so that they always have the current toolchain information > > a few older packages however (jpeg comes to mind) use the system libtool > instead of bundling their own
What I mean is that if library X say libjpeg, which uses libstdc++ properly links to libstdc++ (ldd libjpeg.so returns libstdc++) there is no need for library/binary Y that uses libX to also link against libstdc++. As such there is no need to specify this in the libtool archive of library X as linking instructions for linking against it. Doing so is superfluous, and the need for the "--as-needed" flag in the first place. It is actually also safe to just delete the libtool archives. In that case normal linking is performed which works perfectly well. Paul -- Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net
pgpPewpvmy0oP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
