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: Dynamically linking against GMP and MPFR

From: "Richard Guenther" <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
To: "Ian Lance Taylor" <iant at google dot com>, ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 16:26:02 +0200
Subject: Re: Dynamically linking against GMP and MPFR
References: <m3sl9lat9s.fsf@localhost.localdomain> <20070525142007.GA427@caradoc.them.org>

On 5/25/07, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> wrote:

On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 07:10:23AM -0700, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> We need a configure time option to link statically against GMP and
> MPFR even if dynamic versions of the libraries are available.
>
> I would argue that static linking should be the default, since that is
> the least surprising option.  People who understand the issues can
> enable dynamic linking.  But I'm willing to be overruled on this
> point.

It's no different than any other library used by any other program.
I wouldn't object to configure support to request static gmp/mpfr for
developer convenience, but GCC is a perfectly normal dynamically
linked program and should behave like one IMO.


I agree.  I wouldn't expect to have to update gcc just because mpfr had
a bugfix.

Richard.

References:
- Dynamically linking against GMP and MPFR
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor
- Re: Dynamically linking against GMP and MPFR
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz

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