On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 08:49:37PM -0500, Baho Utot wrote: > > I have been working on mpc. > > I have noticed that the way it is built in the book it only builds the static > library. > > If --enable-shared is passed to configure it look like that is ignored as it > still doesn't build the shared library. > > If autoreconf is run before doing the configure it builds the shared library > as well. > > I expect gcc will links to mpc statically as per the book.
I disagree with the first part. I don't have the book open in front of me (just shutting down, but this looked important enough to take a look). I use ./configure --prefix=/usr and I also have 'unset CFLAGS' before this because of the following comment: # checking whether the gcc linker # (/tools/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ld -m elf_x86_64) supports # shared libraries... ./configure: line 8413: : supported targets:.* # elf: command not found no # http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/mpc-discuss/2011-February/000809.html # and then # http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/mpc-discuss/2011-February/000819.html From that, and with my buildscript functions to rename static libs to .hidden and to note what now exists which is newer than when I began to build the package (might not catch all the headers), I see the following were installed: /usr/include/mpc.h /usr/lib/libmpc.a.hidden /usr/lib/libmpc.la /usr/lib/libmpc.so /usr/lib/libmpc.so.2 /usr/lib/libmpc.so.2.0.0 /usr/share/info/dir /usr/share/info/mpc.info For the second part, I don't know which parts of gcc are linked against libmpc, so the fact that I can't see them in a quick look with ldd doesn't unduly concern me. If anyone has evidence either for or against libmpc being linked statically in gcc, please share it! ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
