Re: 3.3 configure static

[Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>]

Erik Poupaert writes:
 > 
 > > In the current case, it might be that we need to link dynamically
 > > against libgcc even if we link statically against libgcj. 
 > 
 > That is exactly what I tried. Linking dynamically against libgcc and statically
 > against libgcj works, by removing the symbolic link to libgcj in the 3.3 lib
 > directory.

Excellent.  If I recall correctly there are some nasty issues to do
with linking statically with libgcc and libgcj.  I can't remember what
they were, unfortunately -- the last time I tried to do anything like
this was a couple of years ago.

 > > Erik, can you look and see why you're linking with libgcc from gcc
 > > 3.2?  Did you do a clean "make install" from gcc 3.3?
 > 
 > I did this on purpose. I removed the libgcc_s link and tried to see if things would
 > work out by just linking libgcj statically. They don't. You also need libgcc_s of
 > version 3.3, and you apparently can't link libgcc_s statically.
 > 
 > By the way, I've also tried deploying libgcj and libgcc to an older machine and set
 > the LD_LIBRARY_PATH to reference them first. The executables still failed...

We do this all the time.  The only problem I can think of is that a
really old glibc may not be suitable.

Andrew.