Mark D. Baushke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I know that gcc-2.7.2.1/gcc.c supports both -Wl and -Xlinker.
Thanks for checking that. That's old enough for me. I installed
this, in both gnulib and coreutils:
2006-01-20 Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* lib-ignore.m4
[ removing the bug-coreutils list, adding libtool-patches ]
* Paul Eggert wrote on Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 06:07:50AM CET:
And perhaps the ldd module itself isn't necessary any more, at least
for now.
Given that it works on enough relevant systems, it would be useful in
Libtool's hardcode.test,
Paul Eggert wrote:
Stepping back from things a bit, I discovered a way to simplify
lib-ignore so that it no longer needs to use ldd. Instead, it merely
uses the '-z ignore' option if this works.
All the better.
One more question about this macro: What is the difference between
-Xlinker and
Hi Bruno,
* Bruno Haible wrote on Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 01:36:35PM CET:
One more question about this macro: What is the difference between
-Xlinker and -Wl (apart from the slightly different syntax)? libtool and
config.rpath sometimes use -Wl to pass an option to the linker and never
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Eggert [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Quoting Bruno Haible [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
It appears that -Xlinker is supported only by gcc, and -Wl by other
compilers too?
Sorry, I had never heard of -Wl. Do you know whether GCC has
supported -Wl
Hi Bruno,
* Bruno Haible wrote on Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 02:04:45PM CET:
To use the 'ldd' module is simple:
- add an AC_REQUIRE([gl_LDD]),
- use
$LDDPROG conftest$ac_exeext $LDDPOSTPROC
I assume you mean
$(LDDPROG) program$(EXEEXT) $(LDDPOSTPROC)
for Makefiles?
Because
Paul Eggert wrote:
+ [for gl_ldd in \
+ ldd \
+ 'chatr' \
+ 'dump -H' \
+ 'elfdump -Dl' \
+ 'odump -Dl' \
+ 'otool -L' \
+ :; do
+ gl_ldd_output0=`($gl_ldd conftest$ac_exeext) 2/dev/null`
Paul Eggert wrote:
I thought this module might be useful for people trying to build
executables on systems like Solaris where the -lrt option causes the
executable to dynamically link to rt, even if the executable does not
need any of the rt routines.
The problem is brought in by the fact
Ralf Wildenhues [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Similarly, `-zignore' is linker dependent.
Yes. If some linkers need some other option to do that, we'll need to
add it to lib-ignore.m4. But in the meantime the existing code should
produce working executables, even with those linkers, since it
Paul Eggert wrote:
If a package like that defines several programs,
only some of which call clock_gettime, then the maintainer will have
to do something like this (this is an extract from
coreutils/src/Makefile.am):
pr_LDADD = $(LDADD) $(LIB_CLOCK_GETTIME)
shred_LDADD = $(LDADD)
Bruno Haible [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Is -zignore fully portable? If you find only a single platform where
-zignore's functionality does not exist, then you need to go back to the
explicit list of potential dependencies.
No, because the link will still work even if we link to all the
11 matches
Mail list logo
