Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> ... static libraries do not technically have "dependencies" since they only
> represent a compilation step (no linking). If a static
> library may also be built as a shared library then it may have dependencies
> and should be described as such.
I've always found this distinction ridiculously annoying. A program/project
that links perfectly
fine when its explicitly listed dependencies are shared libraries suddenly
fails to link when
you change to using -static. It's also simple to remedy - just list the
dependencies inside a
member of the archive file.
Please consider this thread and adopting the feature implemented there:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2020-September/113188.html
> The final shared library or program itself surely has "dependencies" since
> otherwise it might not successfully link due to unresolved symbols.
--
-- Howard Chu
CTO, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/
