Re: [Boost-build] Question re building libraries

From: MANSION, James, FM (James.MANSION_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-02-28 05:04:12

>So, if first create N static libraries, and then link them
> together into one DLL, right?

Or sometimes multiple DLLs, with different combinations of
the support code in them (which typically will not export
symbols).

>This sounds like you create N DLLS and then link them into one
> static library.  I'm confused, can you clarify what you want
> exactly.

The formaer, above, I want a library of code compiled for
eventual dynamic linking.

>I'm not sure about flags for a.cpp. On Linux, the above won't
> add -fPIC, but this is inefficiency, not a show-stopper. On
Windows -- what flags specifically should be there?

I would regard this as a show-stopper.  Some libraries need to
Be compiled with knowledge that they are in a DLL - ACE,
wxWidgets come to mind.  Some MFC stuff does as well.

Its not generic but specific to the code at hand.

As I see it, a static link library is a way to manage a bunch
of objects conveniently as a whole such that the link editor
can select from it to fulfill requirements.  DLLs are more
like executables than static libraries.

So ... The compilation switches that need to be applied to a
source file to create an object should really relate to
whether it will eventually be directly linked into an executable,
or linked into a DLL.  It should not be determined by whether it
gets aggregated into a static library as an intermediate step.

James

***********************************************************************************
The Royal Bank of Scotland plc. Registered in Scotland No 90312. Registered Office: 36 St Andrew Square, Edinburgh EH2 2YB. 
Authorized and regulated by the Financial Services Authority 
 
This e-mail message is confidential and for use by the 
addressee only. If the message is received by anyone other 
than the addressee, please return the message to the sender 
by replying to it and then delete the message from your 
computer. Internet e-mails are not necessarily secure. The 
Royal Bank of Scotland plc does not accept responsibility for 
changes made to this message after it was sent. 

Whilst all reasonable care has been taken to avoid the 
transmission of viruses, it is the responsibility of the recipient to 
ensure that the onward transmission, opening or use of this 
message and any attachments will not adversely affect its 
systems or data. No responsibility is accepted by The Royal 
Bank of Scotland plc in this regard and the recipient should carry 
out such virus and other checks as it considers appropriate. 
Visit our websites at: 
http://www.rbos.com
http://www.rbsmarkets.com 
********************************************************************************