On Wed, 3 Feb 2010 18:08:34 -0600 (CST), Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > Should we default to using --with-single-library=1? [I'd prefer this - > as it will minimize dlopen issues from external packages.] > > Also - I'd like to have distinct library names between > --with-single-library=0 and 1 - so that there is no ambiguity. > > i.e libpetsc.a for --with-single-library=1 > libpetscsys.a [instead of current libpetsc.a] for --with-single-library=0
I also like distinguishing between libpetsc (the whole thing) and libpetscsys, it makes it easier to write robust auto-configure stuff to find PETSc. Note that with shared libs, you can build them separately, link the front-end ld -shared -o libpetsc.so libpetsc*.so and then the same install is available as one convenient chunk (just -lpetsc) or in whatever granularity is desired, and it still enforces the module boundaries. I'm not sure I see the benefit of static linking with-single-library because they still have to explicitly link recursive dependencies. Jed
