19.04.2014, 04:45, "JonY" <10wa...@gmail.com>: > On 4/19/2014 03:31, Evgeny Grin wrote: >> For XBMC we have 41 depend precompiled lib, 4 of them depend on zlib dll, >> all of 4 depend on zlib1.dll, but each one on specific zlib version. And >> with some zlib versions some of depend dlls crash. >> But it's just an example. Sometimes only a small fraction of lib functions >> is used, so it's better and wiser to statically link only those functions >> for shared lib and not redistribute heavy additional dll with your dll. >> There are far more possibile good uses for static libs in shared libs. >> MS dev tools allow any combinations of shared/static link, why libtool give >> worse possible options? > > I think you should be cleaning house, instead of allowing random bits > and bobs to connect together. The real problem is that you have 4 > incompatible versions of zlib1.dll in the first place.
Of course cleaning is required, but it's not always possible to simple rebuild some particular lib on Win32. But I was talking about ability to link static in shared. > Libtool is good at preventing multiple exports on win32, I have seen > disasters where zlib is exported *multiple* times in different DLLs of > the same project because the author does not know what is going on. At > least it was a compatible and same version of zlib. Right, it's nice idea to prevent static link for shared lib that blindly use "--export-all-symbols". But for well-designed libs that use dllexport attribute or def-file disallowing static libs is just obstacle. >> Didn't see anything that prevent linking static libs in shared libs. >> Additionally libtool can track if some particular lib use >> "dllexport"/def-files or simple export of all symbols. > > The difference is that convenience are purely used build time only, they > are never ever installed. It is convenient when you have enough object > files to overrun the OS command line length limit. > > I'm not sure you want convenient dlls that aren't installed, they don't > make sense. Ok, I got the advantage of libtool, but still don't understand why this should prevent linking static libs in well-designed shared lib? _______________________________________________ https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
