This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: paths for headers and libraries

> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2002 at 02:22:39PM -0800, David Byron wrote:
> > When compiling with no switches for modifying the include
> > search path, I see from gcc -v that it's looking in
> > /usr/local/include first.  This is fine, except that when
> > linking with -l, and no switches for modifying the library
> > search path, the library gets picked up from /usr/lib.
> > 
> > Is this the default behavior of gcc, or some artifact of
> > configure switches or something else?
> The linker on your system has a default list of directories
> which it looks for libraries in.  This default list is
> compiled directly into the linker.
> ld --verbose | grep SEARCH
> SEARCH_DIR(/lib); SEARCH_DIR(/usr/lib); 
> SEARCH_DIR(/usr/local/lib); SEARCH_DIR(/usr/i386-redhat-linux/lib);
> Read the gcc and ld documentation for ways of changing the
> search path.  Using the -L flag is one way to do it.

I should have asked another question the first time.  Does this setup cause other people grief -- looking in /usr/local first for headers but /usr first for libs?  From looking at binutils/ld/, this seems to be the default.  If not, I guess I did something out-of-the-ordinary when installing my duplicate stuff in /usr/local.  Since I think looking in /usr/local first is right, I'll move this to the binutils list if it goes much further.

Thanks for your help.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]