Boost-Build :

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

From: eracce (eracce_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-10 08:54:38

Next message: Guido Ziliotti: "[Boost-build] linking to boost binaries"
Previous message: Chris Weed: "Re: [Boost-build] maximum verticies path or static b level computation"
Next in thread: Vladimir Prus: "Re: [Boost-build] Why no "--no-undefined" linker flag?"
Reply: Vladimir Prus: "Re: [Boost-build] Why no "--no-undefined" linker flag?"

I'm wondering why the "-Wl,--no-undefined" flag is not set by default so the
linker won't allow unresolved symbols from object files when building shared
libraries.
Perhaps even "Wl,--no-allow-shlib-undefined" should be used?

I'm just curious why these flags were not used. I think they are quite
necessary. Am I missing something?

text/html attachment: attachment

Next message: Guido Ziliotti: "[Boost-build] linking to boost binaries"
Previous message: Chris Weed: "Re: [Boost-build] maximum verticies path or static b level computation"
Next in thread: Vladimir Prus: "Re: [Boost-build] Why no "--no-undefined" linker flag?"
Reply: Vladimir Prus: "Re: [Boost-build] Why no "--no-undefined" linker flag?"

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Boost-Build list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk