Re: Gcc libraries

2003-02-18 Thread Miloslav Trmac
On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 10:59:52PM +0530, Ajay Bansal wrote: > libstdc++.so -> libstdc++.so.4 or libstdc++.so -> libstdc++.so.5 > > But that is not the case on Linux. That *is* the case for most libraries, when compiling, so that you can only specify -lncurses. The generated binary requires l

RE: Gcc libraries

2003-02-18 Thread Ajay Bansal
Thanks everybody for inputs. Now I'll return to my original question. Linking by gcc is done in such a way that library names are stored with their version number intact. What I mean is that say I build a program test.cpp with gcc. On doing ldd, I get the following output, ldd ./a.out l

RE: Gcc libraries

2003-02-18 Thread John
ons need to be resolved at runtime and thus programs come up faster. [summer@hawk summer]$ It may be new in RHL 8.0. > > -Original Message- > From: John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 2:55 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Gcc libra

Re: Gcc libraries

2003-02-18 Thread Edward S. Marshall
On Tue, Feb 18, 2003 at 10:59:19AM +0530, Ajay Bansal wrote: > Don't have man page for prelink Then you need to install that package. :-) -- Edward S. Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://esm.logic.net/ Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas. ___

RE: Gcc libraries

2003-02-17 Thread John
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Ajay Bansal wrote: > Can I do static linking in such a way that only gcc static libraries are > linked. With -static option, all the libraries expected are of static in > nature, whereas my product has 100 shared libs of its own and it is > _not_ possible to have that static i

Re: Gcc libraries

2003-02-17 Thread John
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Jonathan Bartlett wrote: > Actually, I believe the load time can be faster on static linking, > especially for C++ because it takes a lot of time for the linker to > resolve those dynamic links. I could be mistaken, though. > man prelink -- Please, reply only to the list.

RE: Gcc libraries

2003-02-17 Thread Jonathan Bartlett
ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 10:16 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Gcc libraries > > > Actually, I believe the load time can be faster on static linking, > especially for C++ because it takes a lot of time for the linker to > resolve tho

RE: Gcc libraries

2003-02-17 Thread Ajay Bansal
: Jonathan Bartlett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 10:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Gcc libraries Actually, I believe the load time can be faster on static linking, especially for C++ because it takes a lot of time for the linker to resolve those dynamic links

Re: Gcc libraries

2003-02-17 Thread Jonathan Bartlett
Actually, I believe the load time can be faster on static linking, especially for C++ because it takes a lot of time for the linker to resolve those dynamic links. I could be mistaken, though. Jon On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, John wrote: > On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Ajay Bansal wrote: > > > Hi All > > > > I

Re: Gcc libraries

2003-02-17 Thread John
On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Ajay Bansal wrote: > Hi All > > I am using gcc 3.2.1 for building my code. > > Now the end customer may not have the shared libs used by gcc like > libstdc++so.5 etc. > > Can I ship these libraries along with the product? Or Do I have to > follow some procedure read the l