On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 05:15:07PM +0100, Miriam Ruiz wrote: > --- Justin Pryzby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribi�: > > On Sun, Feb 06, 2005 at 07:36:42AM +0100, Miriam Ruiz wrote: > > > Yep, you were right, I had to link all the > > objects. > > > Thanks for the clue!! :) > > Cool; can you give us a comparison of the relative sizes of the > > packages? Compiling statically, dynamically, and > > > static-for-the-exe-but-nothing-else-linked-to-the-library? > > > > Cheers, -- Justin Pryzby > > Of course, there goes the numbers: Good you saved a 10k:). Really, though, you saved yourself a few files, which is nice.
You might be interested in the --whole-archive option to ld (see its manpage for details). It is often used to make a shared library from a static one, and this use is discouraged (read: "forbidden"). But I think you might have a legitimate use for it; if the upstream build system likes to create a library, you can modify just the creation of the executable to include the entire library (instead of what would potentially be a messy hack to include all of the files inside it, since linking to it as a library only includes the necessary symbols). Note also that if you are not making a shared library, you should not be compiling with -fPIC. That means all of the code included into the executable. The .so plugins *must* be compiled -fPIC. See policy for details. Cherio, Justin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
