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