Re: Linking convenience libraries

[Albert Chin]

On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 09:39:36PM -0600, Albert Chin wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2005 at 12:01:26PM -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, Albert Chin wrote:
> > 
> > >When using the compiler to perform the link and linking against
> > >convenience libraries, is there any reason to link explicitly against
> > >the extracted objects of the convenience libraries rather than just
> > >the .a file? I'm running into a problem on IRIX with the SGI C++
> > >compiler that is solved if I link the .a files. I see no reason why we
> > >extract the convenience libraries libraries when linking against the
> > >compiler v. the linker.
> > 
> > If we link against the .a file directly then the only objects which 
> > will get pulled in are the ones required to link (resolve symbols). 
> > This means that much of the library may be missing.
> > 
> > If we are building an application it is desirable to shed unnecessary 
> > objects but it is not desirable to do that for libraries.
> 
> What if we use $whole_archive_flag_spec?
> 
> Are the following equivalent on Linux?
>   1. ld -soname libfoo.so 1.o 2.o 3.o [all .o's from lib1.a] \
>      [all .o's from lib2.a]
>   2. ld -soname libfoo.so 1.o 2.o 3.o \
>      --whole-archive lib1.a lib2.a -no-whole-archive
> 
> If so, then we should be able to use $whole_archive_flag_spec in lieu
> of extracting everything.

Sorry, this is already used when creating shared libraries.

-- 
albert chin (address@hidden)