[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Building all static

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: Building all static
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 16:56:43 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 04:33:45PM CET:
> Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> > On Tue, 2 Nov 2004, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> > 
> > This seems like a particularly bad idea to me.  What is the value of
> > changing existing documented libtool behavior?
> Consistency, and user expectation.  Looking through the archives I see the
> repeated question of why -static still links shared libraries for libtool,
> but not when linking with the compiler driver or system linker:

I think that if there were a way to specify options to `libtool
--mode=link' on the configure line, then probably many people could
settle with -all-static.  Anyway you do it, users cannot at the moment
use both possibilities, because one of them will not pass configure
tests.  /That/ is the main problem.

Guess you could even map that to --enable-all-static or something like
that (ugly, I know).


reply via email to

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