On 08/ 3/11 03:43 AM, David Coakley wrote: > Christopher, I am not sure what problem you might be thinking of on > Solaris. We are not using '-static' to link the executables in the > non-shared build -- we just build the Open64 components as archive > libraries instead of shared objects. ack
When you said reducing driver complexity I thought this may include a fully static binary as well > Regarding the long-term direction, I don't understand what the shared > objects in Open64 are doing for us. They introduce a lot of > complexity in the code and the Makefiles, so we should have good > reason to maintain them. > > If there are no objections, I will commit this change and follow up > with a proposed patch to remove the BUILD_SKIP_PROMPF and > BUILD_SKIP_PURPLE macros and the code they enclose. Sun did object and I think you should wait until he signs off on this --------- @sun A decent build system shouldn't get in the way of a static build in most cases.. Edit foo.h/.cxx and all dependencies should just magically rebuild with a new make. That's really not different from swapping out foo.so What's more is that you're less likely to end up with incompatible ir_b2a and friends. I'm not arguing for -static, but just saying that ease of building and developer time shouldn't get in the way. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ BlackBerry® DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA The must-attend event for mobile developers. Connect with experts. Get tools for creating Super Apps. See the latest technologies. Sessions, hands-on labs, demos & much more. Register early & save! http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-blackberry-1 _______________________________________________ Open64-devel mailing list Open64-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open64-devel
