Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 03:03:47
Message-Id: 20080531040338.26a64f31@snowcone
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?) by Ravi Pinjala
1 On Fri, 30 May 2008 21:50:49 -0500
2 Ravi Pinjala <ravi@××××××××.net> wrote:
3 > Could you explain, for the benefit of us spectators, what these
4 > libtool problems are, and what cleaner solution you have in mind?
5 > It'd make this whole discussion a lot more comprehensible.
7 libtool links against dependencies-of-dependencies, rather than just
8 direct dependencies. This is correct behaviour on some platforms under
9 some situations (one example is static linking). But when linking
10 shared objects on modern Unixy platforms it's a pain in the ass since
11 you end up with a load of bogus shared object dependencies that break
12 things unnecessarily upon upgrades.
14 as-needed works around this by making the linker only link things from
15 the command line that resolve a name dependency (but name dependencies
16 aren't the only dependency type). This means that most of the extras
17 libtool adds in end up getting ignored, but it also means that things
18 the programmer has explicitly said to link in get ignored too.
20 The correct fix is to make libtool only link to dependencies of
21 dependencies when doing, for example, static linking. Debian has a
22 half-working patch for this that I posted earlier in the thread.
24 --
25 Ciaran McCreesh


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature