On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 03/24/08 13:50 CST: > > > > What comes after the "-Wl,-rpath"? If nothing, then that would be an > > error to the linker. Better to remove it unless there's a good reason > > to set RPATH. > > I'm not sure what that means, as I don't have a real good handle on > the internal workings of the linker. It would be so much easier (for > me anyway) if you spent the 5 seconds to cut and paste the command, > edit it to how you think it should be and push the send button. :-)
I'm sorry, I don't have the tcl source handy, but I think I know what it looks like from the comments here. -Wl,-rpath passes the -rpath option to the linker from the compiler. However, -rpath needs an argument: the directory or directories that you want to encode into the RPATH tag. Without an argument, ld will choke: $ ld -rpath ld: unrecognized option '-rpath' ld: use the --help option for usage information $ ld -rpath /foo ld: no input files Well, it chokes in both cases, but in the second case only because I haven't supplied it with anything to actually link. > There's been comments about how it is wrong, but no actual markup > to show what you're saying. That leaves me guessing. At this point > I'm just going to leave the Trac ticket in the system and hope that > somebody picks it up and fixes the issue. Looking at my system's tclConfig.sh (8.4.14), it looks like the best thing to do is just blank the _SEARCH_FLAGS variables. So, you end up with this: TCL_CC_SEARCH_FLAGS='' vs. TCL_CC_SEARCH_FLAGS='-Wl,-rpath' which is an error unless you follow it up with ",/some/dir". Man, there's a lot of useless garbage in that file. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
