In article <199907210557.baa43...@cs.rpi.edu>, David E. Cross <cro...@cs.rpi.edu> wrote: > > The problem indeed was conflicting libraries... (in /usr/X11R6/lib).. however > I did place on the line *immediately* before the -lwcs a -L/usr/local/lib, > however it appeared to take the /usr/X11R6/lib (which was in a previous -L > statement) version instead. Is this correct?
Yes, it's correct. The -L options can appear anywhere relative to the -l options -- even after them -- and it doesn't make any difference. The relative ordering among the -L options with respect to *each other* is all ld cares about. That's been the traditional behavior on every Unix system I've ever used that supported -L at all. John -- John Polstra j...@polstra.com John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "No matter how cynical I get, I just can't keep up." -- Nora Ephron To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
