On 23 Feb 2017 12:22, Jack Bates wrote: > On 23/02/17 12:04 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On 23 Feb 2017 09:01, Jack Bates wrote: > >> On 22/02/17 12:16 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > >>> On 22 Feb 2017 10:32, Jack Bates wrote: > >>>> How can I avoid dynamically linking with libstdc++? > >>>> or, how can I keep -lstdc++ out of $postdeps? > >>> > >>> let's back up. what is it you're actually trying to do ? > >>> you want to create a statically linked C++ program ? > >>> you want to link a C program ? > >>> something else ? > >> > >> Well, I'm asking for a friend [1]. It sounds like he's got one version > >> of libstdc++ in his build infrastructure and another (older) version on > >> his production machines. He wants to avoid using the older version (I > >> think because of an issue with the STL) which is why he's trying to keep > >> -lstdc++ out of the linker arguments. > > > > unfortunately, trying to hack the link lines won't help with this. the > > headers and libraries are kept in sync. you can't use newer headers and > > try to run against older libraries. > > > > your best bet is probably to just get an older toolchain and use that to > > compile. or get a copy of the distro that's used in production and use > > that to compile the code you care about. distros often can be used in > > chroots so it's not like you need to reinstall the entire system. > > As far as I know, the headers and libraries in the build infrastructure > are in sync with each other. -static-libstdc++ should use that version, > no? Whereas -lstdc++ runs the risk of dynamically linking with the older > version on the production machines -- which is what he wants to avoid. > Or do I misunderstand? Thanks for your help!
correct, if you use -static-libstdc++, then you should get a C++ prog that should run fine on older distros even if they have older libstdc++ runtimes. -mike
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
