On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 07:32:01PM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Mon, 24 May 2004, Albert Chin wrote: > > >On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 08:19:00AM +0200, Szombathelyi Gy?rgy wrote: > >>I've just curious if is it possible _not_ to link a program/lib against > >>its indirect dependencies. I mean if libC is linked against libB and > >>libB is against libA then libtool will link libC against libA, which is > >>not neccessary in most situations (at least not on Linux, but I guess > >>not in most ELF platforms). What I've discovered is that libtool always > >>links against all the depencency_libs in the .la file. Here's a thread > >>about this issue in KDE: > >>http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=108534182408921&w=2 > > > >dependency_libs doesn't contain just libraries. Maybe LDFLAGS as well, > >like -pthread. BTW, is it _really_ a problem to link against > >everything in dependency_libs? Indirectly, this is going to happen > >anyway even if libtool doesn't do this. > > Of course the correct answer is that not linking against indirect > dependencies is non-portable. Certainly Microsoft Windows DLLs > require full linkage, and I believe/suspect that AIX does as well.
I don't see it that way. If a backend optimization can be done for a specific platform, why not? If we lose nothing, I don't see why libtool should not do it. The solution is still portable, as far as libtool is concerned. Such a change wouldn't change any of the cross-platform functionality libtool provides. -- albert chin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) _______________________________________________ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool