Hey Bruce!
Bruce Korb wrote:
> ``-static'' needs to imply the common and ordnary meaning of ``static''.
> "libtool" is a less common and ordinary command than either "gcc" or "ld".
> It is not a directly obvious thing that you would need to add the qualifier
> "all-" to it in order to actually get static linking.
>
> Being obvious is far more important
Not forgetting the excellent advantage that ./configure LDFLAGS=-static would
behave as expected. In fact, if configure didn't run a test that noticed the
difference between `ld/cc -static' and `libtool --mode=link ld/cc -static',
then it could be made to behave even better than expected by cleverly omitting
the system libraries from the list of statically linked objects :-)
> than compatibility for the few users who:
>
> 1. use -static
> 2. don't want fully static
> 3. would have a hard time coping with the change
>
> :-) Cheers - Bruce
What he said :-) As long as they are `few'. I happen to think that they
really are.
And for the very few who really really want fully static, they can still use
-all-static to stop libtool trying to outsmart them.
Cheers,
Gary.
--
Gary V. Vaughan ())_. gary@{lilith.warpmail.net,gnu.org}
Research Scientist ( '/ http://tkd.kicks-ass.net
GNU Hacker / )= http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool
Technical Author `(_~)_ http://sources.redhat.com/autobook
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
