This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [lto-plugin, build] Don't link libiberty.a into liblto-plugin.a
On Wed, 15 Dec 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> It is certainly possible to just write a fake .la file for a convenience
> libiberty/pic/libiberty.a. You wouldn't even need libtool for that.
> I'm not sure whether it will fix all your issues though. The idea with
> convenience libraries is that they are static, linked wholly into real
> libraries, and normally into programs, and never installed. This
> doesn't quite match the intended semantics.
libiberty shouldn't be installed by default. (It is, but as far as I'm
concerned that's a bug. A configure option or makefile target to install
it would be fine.) Nor should it be built for the target (again, I
consider it a bug that it is so built; no target code I know of in the GCC
or src trees uses the target libiberty, and it includes
GPL-with-no-exception code that is not generally appropriate for target
libraries in GCC). What's the mismatch?
(When linked into the LTO plugin, libiberty symbols, and any other plugin
symbols that aren't actually part of the public interface to linker
plugins, should be hidden rather than exported - that is, it should just
export the "onload" symbol. But this is just a matter of cleanliness and
I don't know how hard it is to implement.)
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com