Unless someone shouts me down, then according to the principle of least surprise, I'm inclined to change the semantics to:
-static do not do any dynamic linking at all -lt-static do not do any dynamic linking of libtool libraries
(We can keep -all-static as an alias to -static).
This seems like a particularly bad idea to me. What is the value of changing existing documented libtool behavior?
The main purpose of building a completely static program is to satisfy security or system bootstrap requirements (/usr partition not mounted). It is not always possible to build a completely static program. It is not usually desirable to build a completely static program. Completely static programs don't necessarily work properly when copied to a somewhat different processor type with the same OS, or a different kernel version.
Bob ====================================== Bob Friesenhahn bfriesen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen
_______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
