>> It is not a bug in g++. The GCC 3.X series introduced a shared libgcc_s.so. There is no longer a static libgcc. >> You will not be able to achieve a full static link using GCC unless you configure/build GCC so that it doesn't use shared libraries. > Ok maybe I'm missing something here, but I don't want to statically link the libgcc, just libxml2 and argtable2. Assume that all the code from libxml2 and argtable2 where compiled into the executable as .o's, and that > object is linked the shared libgcc, libg++, and lib > > I have compiled libxml2 and argtable2 into static .a files. I see no reason while I can't link those statically and link gcc libraries shared. > But there seems to be no switch in gcc to do that. > > Here's a more general problem. What if I want to link one library static > and one shared. I can't seem to see any way to do that with g++'s linker > switches. > > I think it is a bug that when you pass valid switches to g++ it barfs with > a really strange error like this.
I'm pretty convinced the problem is with the -static flag. There isn't enough granularity. The odd thing is I know the linker can do what I want to do. argtable2 produces both a shared and static library. If I delete the shared library, and don't pass static, the linker does exactly what I want. If I leave the default configuration, there is no way to link argtable2.a and the shared system libs. I guess the solution is to take the shared versions of argtable2 out of the linker path. I knew that going in, but I thought I could come up with something more elegant. I guess I was wrong. _______________________________________________ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
