On 14 Jul 2015, at 18:45, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> On 14 Jul 2015, at 18:24, Jason Merrill wrote:
>
>> On 06/18/2015 04:12 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>>> The patch below pushes -static-libstdc++ onto the output command line (for
>>> targets without -Bstatic/dynamic) so that such specs have an oppor
On 14 Jul 2015, at 18:24, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 06/18/2015 04:12 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
>> The patch below pushes -static-libstdc++ onto the output command line (for
>> targets without -Bstatic/dynamic) so that such specs have an opportunity to
>> fire.
>
> Won't that produce an unrecogni
On 06/18/2015 04:12 AM, Iain Sandoe wrote:
The patch below pushes -static-libstdc++ onto the output command line (for
targets without -Bstatic/dynamic) so that such specs have an opportunity to
fire.
Won't that produce an unrecognized flag error from the linker?
Jason
Ping
On 18 Jun 2015, at 09:12, Iain Sandoe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This came up in a User question last night and reminded me that I had a patch
> for it in my Q.
>
>
>
> Usually g++ driver support for -static-libstdc++ is provided by "-Bstatic
> -lstdc++ -Bdynamic" and is currently disabled f
Hi,
This came up in a User question last night and reminded me that I had a patch
for it in my Q.
Usually g++ driver support for -static-libstdc++ is provided by "-Bstatic
-lstdc++ -Bdynamic" and is currently disabled for targets without that linker
support. However, actually, there is