> On 12/01/2009 06:04 PM, Jonas Thiem wrote:
> > This topic is rather old, and I'm referring to a particular post which
> > can be found here:
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/libtool@gnu.org/msg03642.html
> > Obviously it isn't possible to link a static lib from a shared lib
> > compiled in libtool
On 12/01/2009 06:04 PM, Jonas Thiem wrote:
This topic is rather old, and I'm referring to a particular post which
can be found here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/libtool@gnu.org/msg03642.html
Obviously it isn't possible to link a static lib from a shared lib
compiled in libtool as libtool blocks i
This topic is rather old, and I'm referring to a particular post which
can be found here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/libtool@gnu.org/msg03642.html
Obviously it isn't possible to link a static lib from a shared lib
compiled in libtool as libtool blocks it (technically it would be
possible on ma
Brad,
A convenience library is usually part of your own package,
it turns into a list of object files when you link to it.
It could be in a subdirectory, much like libltdl is for
many packages that use it.
Here is a section of the manual that mentions them:
http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manu
Does a convenience library have to be part of your own
package? I've looked through the libtool manual and
cannot find anything about convenience libraries, a pointer
to a reference would be greatly appreciated.
If it must be part of your own build, it would be nearly
impossible to convert all of O
Brad,
You are correct that all PPC code is pic, so is Alpha.
Still, that doesn't mean that this behavior is portable,
nor does it mean that building a shared lib from a
static archive is a "good" thing to do. Your software will
be better off if it does not depend on archive libraries
being PIC, a
Ok, I've put some thought into this over the weekend,
and I think it should be classified as a BUG. The
argument you put up about library compiled as PIC
is irrelevant on PPC. Here's a snippet from the
libtool manual:
(http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual.html#FOOT11)
"All code compiled for
On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, Brad House wrote:
> Convenience library? That's a term I'm not familiar with, do you
> have a reference I can look at that describes this further, or
> give me a general overview.
This is a Libtool/Automake feature. See the libtool documentation. A
convenience library is a
Convenience library? That's a term I'm not familiar with, do you
have a reference I can look at that describes this further, or
give me a general overview.
Thanks a lot for your help.
-Brad
Robert Boehne wrote:
Suggestion 1, you could link to shared libraries rather than archives.
Suggestion 2,
Suggestion 1, you could link to shared libraries rather than archives.
Suggestion 2, if you're building it yourself, make the static libs
convenience libraries, this will have the same effect as linking to
static libs, but is portable.
HTH,
Robert
Brad House wrote:
>
> Thanks for your reply.
Thanks for your reply.
Do you happen to know a flag or something I can send to libtool
to force it to go ahead and link against the library? Basically,
we compile on Linux, FreeBSD, SCO OpenServer/Unixware, Solaris 8&9,
AIX and all of those work fine.
Any suggestions other than totally ripping l
Many/most operating systems require that anything linked into a shared
library be compiled as PIC. The only way that libtool can be sure
that the code in a library is compiled as PIC is if it is also a
shared library. Some system linkers will reject linking against
static libraries when building
12 matches
Mail list logo
