On 2/10/16, Bob Friesenhahn <bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us> wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Feb 2016, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> I agree wholeheartedly with the notion that --disable-static should end
>> up in a failure and not somehow degrade to a static build anyway. I
>
> Is this not the case?  I have seen builds on Windows fail due to using
> --disable-static.

I just tested it on a library which does not specify -no-undefined, and
therefore won't be built as a shared lib on Windows:

  ./configure
  [...]
  libtool: warning: undefined symbols not allowed in i486-pc-mingw32
shared libraries; building static only

  ./configure --disable-static
  [...]
  libtool:   error: can't build i486-pc-mingw32 shared library unless
-no-undefined is specified

So things fail as expected, although the error message seems a bit poor.

Cheers,
  Nick

_______________________________________________
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool

Reply via email to