This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org 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: [3.2/3.3/HEAD] shared libobjc not built

From: "Andrea 'fwyzard' Bocci" <fwyzard at inwind dot it>
To: Nicola Pero <nicola at brainstorm dot co dot uk>
Cc: Matthias Klose <doko at cs dot tu-berlin dot de>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 02 Jan 2003 17:05:43 +0100
Subject: Re: [3.2/3.3/HEAD] shared libobjc not built
References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030102162946.00b27d60@popmail.libero.it>

At 15.48 02/01/2003 +0000, Nicola Pero wrote:

> So, yes, I think it's intended, but I don't know why.

I don't know either ... I don't remember - maybe a historical leftover ?

I think if shared libraries are supported, libobjc should be built as
shared.  It should definitely be built as shared, why building it
statically ?  A static libobjc is usually more of a problem than a shared
one!

I don't actually use, ObjC, so I don't really know about it But I always build with --enable-shared, just to be sure :-)
Maybe some Knowledgeable Person here can aswer that...

fwyzard

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [3.2/3.3/HEAD] shared libobjc not built
  - From: Nicola Pero

References:
- Re: [3.2/3.3/HEAD] shared libobjc not built
  - From: Andrea 'fwyzard' Bocci
- Re: [3.2/3.3/HEAD] shared libobjc not built
  - From: Nicola Pero

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