Subject: Re: static vs. dynamic runtime linking, again
To: None <tech-userlevel@netbsd.org>
From: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
List: tech-userlevel
Date: 01/25/2005 12:57:16
>> I found -L. I found no hint that anything more was needed. Based
>> on list mail, I searched the manpage for "-R" and for "rpath";
>> neither produced any hits.
>> Now, as a naïve new user, *what am I supposed to do*!?
> man 1 ld
> man 1 ld.elf_so
> After all, it's not really cc that does the linking.
It's not really cc that does any of the compilation steps, as the cc
manpage makes clear. The cc manpage does not, however, make it clear
that ld is the "linker" the rest of the manpage talks about.
> And also, ld is xrefed from cc.
True. So are eight other manpages, all for irrelevant things and some
of them quite large, with nothing in the SEE ALSO section to indicate
which of them is which.
And I don't see anything referring to ld.elf_so in the cc or ld
manpages.
I take it, then, that you think it is reasonable to require that new
users grovel the manpages in enough detail to discover all this in
order to build and run a hello-world X program?
In any case, it appears that yes, NetBSD does consider the existing
behaviour perfectly reasonable. Fine; I'll go away again.
/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B