This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Should we allow -static libfoo.so?

To: DJ Delorie <dj at delorie dot com>
Subject: Re: Should we allow -static libfoo.so?
From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 18:47:11 -0700
Cc: binutils at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
References: <20010509181557.B1775@lucon.org> <200105100128.VAA14785@envy.delorie.com>

On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 09:28:02PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> 
> > Should I make a patch to make linking DSO with -static a fatal
> > error?
> 
> Why?  I wouldn't think that the -static option affects cases where the
> user explicitly asks for a specific file, but only that it decides
> which types of files are searched for first by -lfoo.

The problem is the executable won't work right under ELF even if you
manage to generate such an executable.


H.J.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Should we allow -static libfoo.so?
  - From: DJ Delorie

References:
- Should we allow -static libfoo.so?
  - From: H . J . Lu
- Re: Should we allow -static libfoo.so?
  - From: DJ Delorie

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]