Re: libtool-1.5.14 make check

[Bob Friesenhahn]

On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > Building libstdc++ and other GCC libraries as shared libraries was
> > (and perhaps still is) not the default.
>
> I guess.  Looking at some install trees around here: seems enabled by
> default with gcc >= 3.2 (at most), disabled by default with gcc <= 2.95.x.
>
> > It is a necessary option that
> > the person who builds/installs GCC needs to be aware of.  It is not
> > feasable to build C++ shared libraries without a shared libstdc++.
>
> So do you think Libtool needs to take care of this?
>
> Should we disable shared libraries for C++ in `configure' if we cannot
> link a small example program using libstdc++?  Do people write useful
> C++ libraries without referencing any symbol from libstdc++?

The static/shared libstdc++ has been a continuing problem.  Note that 
there have also been problems under Cygwin and MinGW where C++ 
exceptions don't work when thrown from DLLs (big problem for 
libstdc++).

Unless the user supplies an option to prohibit use of standard 
libraries, the C++ compiler is going to supply them anyway.  It is 
likely a good idea to prohibit building a C++ shared library using a 
static libstdc++, even if it appears to succeed.  However, if the link 
with libstdc++ can be postponed to application build time, then things 
will still work with a static libstdc++.

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
address@hidden, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/