Andy Howell <AndyHowell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> LLeweLLyn Reese wrote:
>
> >>Andy Howell wrote:
> >>
> >> I needed to add -lsupc++ to the linker flags. It links now.
> > [snip]
> > In the future, link c++ using g++ and not gcc or ld so you will not
> > have to track down weird errors like this. g++ will put the right
> > flags in for you.
>
> Thats the odd thing, it was calling g++.
I'm sorry, I'm confused now. What was calling g++ ?
> I thought the supc++ was "supplimental".
No. libsupc++ === language support library for C++. All of the code
necessary for supporting the C++ runtime is either in libsupc++ or
libgcc . What is troubling me (as a user of gcc; I'm not a
developer) is that most users should not need to know about libgcc
and libsupc++, but problems related to them keep turning up on
this list. However, so far I haven't encountered these problems
myself.
> I've since realized that I need -lstdc++ instead. I'm
> sure I should not need to do this, but it works now, so I'm happy.
No, you shouldn't, not if you are using 'g++' to link. I can agree
with being happy because it works but I am afraid the real problem
has not been solved but instead has merely been sent back into
dormancy. Hopefully I am wrong. :-)
