Re: [dev] How about ?

From: pancake <>
Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 20:04:00 +0200

Dunno about gold. Url? But well... Being c++ i farly prefer to use radare apis. Which are saner and C.

Read between lines..

On 01/08/2010, at 20:15, Anselm R Garbe <> wrote:

> On 1 August 2010 08:30, pancake <> wrote:
>> Cant this be done with a wraper shellscript ? Messing with gnu ld is like a
>> near death experience.
> Indeed, it can be done using some shell scripts but it'll be quite
> slow. My initial efforts were gold related, though that's written in
> C++ which is a bit annoying.
>> Using r2libs can also be possible.. But would be more complex than a few loc
>> shellscript.
>> That's what libtool does ( between many other silly things) which we dont
>> need, and certainly i would prefer to be cmpiler agnostic and be able to use
>> tcc or llvm.
> Afaik gold is compiler agnostic as long as ELF is involved.

Each compiler generates its own .o files.. Doesnt means to be compatible betweeen versions or distributiobs.
>> Inthe other side u can do this by specifying --enable-static and
>> --dudable-shared in any prj using autofools (webkit, X11 ..)
>> I dont get the point with the 'tee like'
> With tee-like I mean that the static libraries are created in a
> different place for later linking lookups, but also to support the
> normal behavior in order that vanilla builds run through smoothly,
> since they usually check for's to carry on.
> A simplified example, imagine:
> ld -o foo.o bar.o baz.o
> The tee-like behavior would result in and some archive
> in /different/place/lib/libsomething.a
This implicit stuff looks weird to me.
> If an executable is involed:
> ld -o something /lib/crt0.o
> we perform a static link and ignore all .so's involved and look for
> /different/place/lib/libsomething.a instead.

But..why you need a .so? I still dont get the point to do it that complicated without any benefit, because all buildings will be static, not dynamic.

> With this in place we should get quite far with building most
> dependencies and executables.
I dont think this is necessary to compile stali.
> Cheers,
> Anselm
Received on Mon Aug 02 2010 - 20:04:00 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Aug 02 2010 - 20:12:02 CEST