http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46695
--- Comment #5 from Iain Sandoe <iains at gcc dot gnu.org> 2010-12-01 12:42:48 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > (In reply to comment #2) > > > > > not I, > > > the addition of -no-undefined was from the Dave K. who needs it to get a > > > .dll > > > to build > > > - without that change, everything is hunky-dory with libtool defaults. > > > > Based on our off-list discussion, I thought that it actually required an > > explicit "-undefined dynamic_lookup"? > > Ah, hang on, I re-read our earlier emails and think I misunderstood. My > understanding now is that that is what you get by default, so simply /not/ > passing "-no-undefined" on Darwin is all that is required. That is how I will > respin the patch. indeed .. a mid-air collision ;) yes, I have checked (at rev. 167243) that simply deleting the "-no-undefined -bindir ..." addition is enough. Originally, I thought we needed to add it explicitly (and, of course, your patch works).
