2011/1/12 Burkhard Plaum <[email protected]>: >> -underlinking is just that, a library fails to link to two libraries it >> uses > > Ok, so never saw any problems with the linker flags, but adding > additional libraries seems to do no harm either. So I leave this > to the packagers.
The library is using them, so it should be indicated (since it's stored in the binary). I didn't found any real problem, but it could cause problems in the future if dependent libraries started changing soname, etc. So it's better to do it correctly. Nowadays I expect distros to use -as-needed anyway, so extra libraries that are not really used are ignored (you could add -Wl,--as-needed directly, but it requires a recent enough ld... 2 years old?) > One problem seems to be the LT_LIB_M macro, which requires > a newer libtool. So my question is, how sure can we be that it's available > and what problems are to be expected, if we hardcode the libm flag simply > to -lm? It's done at numerous other locations as well and seems to work > fine. It's my understanding that it's something pretty (GNU?) specific. The functions defined in libm are from the standard C library, so they "should" be in libc. But I suppose for performance purposes it's splitted in the typical GNU/Linux system. I have no problems hardcoding -lm, but people with some esoteric systems could have problems. If it's used in other parts of the system and nobody complained... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Protect Your Site and Customers from Malware Attacks Learn about various malware tactics and how to avoid them. Understand malware threats, the impact they can have on your business, and how you can protect your company and customers by using code signing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl _______________________________________________ Gmerlin-general mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gmerlin-general
