Re: [jamboost] Re: v2: gcc and static linking

From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-13 11:52:35

Andre Hentz wrote:

> > 1. Why do you need static linking to a specific library?
>
> I need a few wrapper programs to link statically against libstdc++ (or
> libsup++). It is part of the specification that they may run on a system
> where libstdc++.so is not present.

What about using fully static linking with

bjam link=statuc link-runtime=static

?

> > 2. One approach is to use:
> >
> > g++ ..... -Wl,-Bstatic -lwhatever
> >
> > however this will fail if there's no static version of whatever. Also,
> > there's assymentry with:
> >
> > g++ ..... -Wl,-Bshared -lwhatever
> >
> > which will link to whatever.so if present, but will also link with
> > whatever.a, not fail. Is the '-Bstatic' behaviour what you're after? I'm
> > a bit worried by its platform-specificity.
>
> Yes, that's what I have in mind. If I use <find-static-library>, I
> expect it to fail if there's no libwhatever.a. In fact, -Bstatic is
> linker-specific, not platform-specific. 

Anyway, I don't really like feature which works only sometimes and on some 
linkers. Maybe, <linkflags> is better.

> That is also the case for 
> "-Wl,-R", "-Wl,-h", "-Wl,-rpath-link" and "-Wl,--strip-all". I'm
> updating my BB setup and haven't got to solaris yet but I believe
> --strip-all is going to cause problems. 

I don't think we use it in V2.

> -rpath-link is also potentialy 
> problematic but I'm not using it so it's not a biggie.

I think we have this issue solved on solaris, anyway.