Re: PATCH: Use libgcj_convenience.la ( Re: libjava bootstrap failureon sparc-sun-solaris2.8)

[Hans-Peter Nilsson <hp at bitrange dot com>]

On 5 Jun 2002, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jun  4, 2002, Loren James Rittle <rittle@latour.rsch.comm.mot.com> wrote:
>
> > This is due to how libtool eats -static in some cases.  (I will not
> > engage in an argument over whether that is good behavior for libtool
> > since I know Alex could explain why it does; it just does.)
>
> Libtool shouldn't just drop -static, ever.  -static means, to libtool,
> prefer static libraries over dynamic ones.  If -static doesn't cause
> libtool to turn say libjava.la into libjava.a, as opposed to -ljava
> that the linker would resolve to say libjava.so, that'd be a bug.
>
> What -static doesn't mean to libtool is to reject any kind of dynamic
> linking.  -all-static does that, and there are good reasons for this.
> I won't delve into them unless I'm asked to.

But -all-static isn't a valid gcc option.  When in a tree such
as the binutils+gcc+whatnot, it's nice to be able to pass
"CC=gcc -static" in the toplevel at configure time, and know
that everything is statically linked.  (And no, that doesn't
work with unpatched libtool.)  Passing "CC=gcc -all-static"
would work if every subdirectory used libtool everywhere, but
just plain where they don't.

brgds, H-P
PS.  Oh, you say this isn't the libtool mailing list?  Oops. ;-)