On 7/3/06, Tuomo Valkonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2006-07-03, Tuomo Valkonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not going to change my build scripts _yet once
> again_ to match a shitty linker that can't find a symbol
> in one of its argument libraries, but expects one to carefully
> tune the order.

The more specific problem being:

gcc foo.a bar.a
        => No, I can't link this because I'm brain-damaged
gcc bar.a foo.a
        => I can't find shit because I'm totally blind
gcc foo.a bar.a foo.a
        => Thanks for beating me with a cluebat, now I found it

Quite old post but perhaps can I help.
It seems that foo.a needs bar.a and bar.a needs foo.a. So, why splitting them. Perhaps, a good solution would be to merge the two in a foo_bar.a.
In computer science, circular dependencies are bad things.




--
Guilhem BONNEFILLE
-=- #UIN: 15146515 JID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-=- mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-=- http://nathguil.free.fr/

Reply via email to