Re: another darwin patch

[Charles Wilson]

Peter O'Gorman wrote:
> Changed the check_method to pass_all (we can link against static archives).

Regardless of whether it is *possible* to build a shared library that 
depends on (external, non-convenience-lib) static archives, it's 
probably not a good idea to do so.  You'll eventually run into symbol 
name conflicts as dependent library heirarchies are released (on 
asynchronous schedules) over time.

I thought there was a policy decision to disallow this behavior, in 
general.  [Said policy really bit cygwin hard, since our *runtime libs* 
like libsubc++ and libgcc are currently available as static only.  As a 
work around, we added a whole bunch of code to "follow the spirit of the 
new policy" -- that is, disallow creation of shared libs depending on 
static libs -- *unless* the problematic static libs were solely those 
runtime libs added by the compiler [-lgcc, -lsupc++, etc].

Anyway, using pass_all obviates the "don't make shared libs that depend 
on static archives" policy; plus, it's a bad idea anyway given the 
eventual problems it'll cause on a platform/distribution level...

Just my 2c.

--Chuck