[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Building all static

From: Gary V. Vaughan
Subject: Re: Building all static
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 16:09:52 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (X11/20040913)

Hi Bob, Ralf!

Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Nov 2004, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>> Is that a mail-only typo?  You used LD_FLAGS instead of LDFLAGS.
>> But then, configure will most likely fail soon, before libtool is even
>> involved -- the compiler will see -all-static and barf.
>> There's been discussion about this on this list about Libtool-specific
>> environment variables and -Xlinker stuff.  However, I do not know a
>> general approach to your setting.  I'd just do
>>  configure LDFLAGS=-static
>>  make LDFLAGS=-all-static
>> but that's obviously a hack.
>> A general solution to this problem is needed.
> The only fool-proof solution is for autoconf to use libtool to execute
> its tests, however, libtool itself is dependent on autoconf so there is
> a seemingly unsolvable problem.

This is a classic bootstrap problem.  A libtool release tarball can be built
without autoconf, and autoconf could generate a configure that used such an
installed libtool for running its tests when the invoked LT_INIT...

Akim and I long ago discussed how life could become much easier if the
autotools merged into a single cooperative package to fix this kind of thing.
 There was some loose agreement that this would happen someday :-(

Gary V. Vaughan      ())_.  address@hidden,}
Research Scientist   ( '/
GNU Hacker           / )=
Technical Author   `(_~)_

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]