[Fedora-packaging] Re: libtool(.la) archive policy proposal

Alexandre Oliva aoliva at redhat.com
Fri Oct 6 02:19:50 UTC 2006

On Oct  5, 2006, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net> wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 02:15:58AM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Oct  2, 2006, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net> wrote:
>> > So, if libtool were to simply ignore dependency_libs when building
>> > against shared libs wouldn't that solve all issues?
>> Nope, it would only solve the common case.
>> It is perfectly possible for a dynamic library to depend on a
>> static-only library.  And it's even possible to create other dynamic
>> libraries out of that, if the static-only library is PIC or the
>> platform can handle non-PIC in dynamic libraries.

> So? That's not a problem with the mentioned patch.

Ignoring dependency_libs would break the following case:

- libA.la, static only, provides symbol A

- libB.la is linked with libA but doesn't bring in symbol A

- program links with libB rightfully expecting it to provide a
definition for A

Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Secretary for FSF Latin America        http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list