[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: flat namespaces redux
From: |
Benjamin Reed |
Subject: |
Re: flat namespaces redux |
Date: |
Mon, 3 Feb 2003 10:01:05 -0500 |
Well, I think that building thing two level namespace ought to be the
libtool default also, flat_namespace is needed for some things but
causes problems for many others, how about trying both by default?
cc -multiply_defined suppress -prebind blah || cc -flat_namespace
-undefined suppress blah
I'm not so sure this is a good idea. Seems like this would make things
harder for packages, since problems *besides* the namespace could also
force it into building flat.
Say I'm building libkdeui, which depends on libkdecore and qt. If the
link line was written on a linuxy system (ie, the linker allows
indirect library references), it would end up doing something like:
1. libkdeui's LIBADD is "-lkdecore"
2. the first half of the link complains that -lqt-mt is indirectly
referenced
3. it builds the library flat, and continues on
when what *should* happen is it dies at #2, and we add -lqt-mt to
libkdeui's LIBADD like it should be.
- flat namespaces redux, Benjamin Reed, 2003/02/02
- Re: flat namespaces redux, Benjamin Reed, 2003/02/02
- Re: flat namespaces redux, Peter O'Gorman, 2003/02/03
- Re: flat namespaces redux,
Benjamin Reed <=
- Re: flat namespaces redux, Peter O'Gorman, 2003/02/03
- Re: flat namespaces redux, Albert Chin, 2003/02/03
- Re: flat namespaces redux, Robert Boehne, 2003/02/04
- Re: flat namespaces redux, Yves de Champlain, 2003/02/04
- Re: flat namespaces redux, Albert Chin, 2003/02/04
- Re: flat namespaces redux, Robert Boehne, 2003/02/04
- Re: flat namespaces redux, Albert Chin, 2003/02/04
- Re: flat namespaces redux, Robert Boehne, 2003/02/04
- Re: flat namespaces redux, Benjamin Reed, 2003/02/06