On 04/11/12 20:30, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > On 2012-04-11 16:59, Sean Kelly wrote: >> On Apr 11, 2012, at 1:25 AM, Jacob Carlborg<d...@me.com> wrote: >> >>> Could it happen that the linker arguments need to be placed first sometimes >>> ? >> >> If it's a user-created library then maybe. The general rule on Unix is that >> dependent objects need to be listed before the object they depend on. I >> think the linker only does a single pass. Optlink doesn't have this >> problem--it's way nicer in this regard. > > That would be the only case where optlink is nicer :) >
Umm, "-( -llib1 -llib2 -)". But using the correct order would be the right solution. artur
