On Thu 23 Aug 2018 at 11:46:10 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote: > That's fine to have this as workaround, but I am not sure that it's > right. I just posted earlier about libtool's behavior of adding > libraries to the link line when using a library that includes them. > > Basically, when linking > > foo: foo.o libbar.la > > and > > libbar.la says that libbar has a dependency_lib of libbaz > > then libtool does > > cc -o foo foo.o -llibbar -llibbaz > > even though foo.o does not need any symbols in baz. > > > This creates dependencies that ought not to exist. Isn't this what (in *.pc files) the difference between Libs: and Libs.private: is for? For dynamic linking you just need Libs, for static linking you (also) need Libs.private. But since this is "relatively new", perhaps not all packages support this / do it right yet? Or is it even libtool that is doing it wrong? -Olaf. -- ___ Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert -- Wayland: Those who don't understand X \X/ rhialto/at/falu.nl -- are condemned to reinvent it. Poorly.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature