* Tim Kientzle [EMAIL PROTECTED] [040113 15:41] wrote:
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
It will refuse to strip symbols if:
foo.o:func1() references bar.o:func2().
But I need it to.
I suppose there are good reasons why you
cannot compile everything into a single
.o file for distribution?
Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm having a hell of a time doing this so I can produce a static
.o or .a with most of the symbols stripped. Two problems seem to be
that even if I use ld -r -o main.o obj1.o obj2.c libfoo.a then I
can not strip symbols in obj1.o that are referenced
* Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav [EMAIL PROTECTED] [040110 03:17] wrote:
Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm having a hell of a time doing this so I can produce a static
.o or .a with most of the symbols stripped. Two problems seem to be
that even if I use ld -r -o main.o obj1.o obj2.c
Alfred Perlstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It will refuse to strip symbols if:
foo.o:func1() references bar.o:func2().
But I need it to.
use -G instead of -K, e.g.
$ strip -G apifunc1 -G apifunc2 foo.o
will make every symbol except apifunc1 and apifunc2 local.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smørgrav
This is driving me insane...
I would like to provide a client with a .o file so that he can link
static against my library. Unfortunatly I need to hide nearly all
the symbols in my object file.
For a shared object this works out super easy, all I do is generate
the .so file, then run strip -N
5 matches
Mail list logo
