Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Thu, 22 Nov 2001 00:21:07 +0100
From:	Corinna Vinschen <vinschen AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: ld ---export--all --exclude-libs,?
Message-ID:	<20011122002107.C27931@cygbert.vinschen.de>
Reply-To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<20011121084158 DOT 22945 DOT qmail AT web14501 DOT mail DOT yahoo DOT com> <20011121110829 DOT B24327 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <3BFBE824 DOT 6000007 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To:	<3BFBE824.6000007@ece.gatech.edu>; from cwilson@ece.gatech.edu on Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 12:45:08PM -0500

On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 12:45:08PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > Isn't the functionality you're searching for already in ld given by
> > the --no-whole-archive options?
> > 
> >   gcc -shared -o cygfoo.dll $(OBJ)
> >       -Wl,--out-implib,libfoo.dll.a
> >       -Wl,--no-whole-archive -lbar -lbaz
> > 
> > Or am I missing the point?
> 
> 
> the problem is, --no-whole-archive applies to EVERY library, even 
> convenience libraries.  For instance, a common autotools idiom is to 
> create various convenience libraries libsubunit1.a and libsubunit2.a. 
> These archives are intended to be included in the eventual .so (.dll) 
> and the internal symbols of libsubunit*.a are INTENDED to be exported 
> from that .so.
> 
> --no-whole-archive makes this idiom impossible; it is not granular 
> enough.  Ralf's solution removes the whole purpose of the idiom -- 
> what's the use of a "convenience" library if you use --no-whole-archive 
> and must then explicitly export every .o contained within the 
> "convenience" library?  You're better off not creating the "convenience" 
> library at all, and just explicitly adding the various .o files to your 
> link command line.

But isn't that the purpose of --whole-archive?  In the above
example I can create the static libs libfoo1.a and libfoo2.a
from $(OBJ) and then call

	gcc -shared -o cygfoo.dll
	    -Wl,--out-implib,libfoo.dll.a
	    -Wl,--whole-archive libfoo1.a libfoo2.a
	    -Wl,--no-whole-archive -lbar -lbaz

Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer                                mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat, Inc.

- Raw text -