This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: PATCH: Ignore --disable-static in libiberty
- From: "H. J. Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
- To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org,gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 10:39:15 -0800
- Subject: Re: PATCH: Ignore --disable-static in libiberty
- References: <20041219034227.GA5169@lucon.org> <orwtvcj2uw.fsf@livre.redhat.lsd.ic.unicamp.br>
On Mon, Dec 20, 2004 at 03:28:39PM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Dec 19, 2004, "H. J. Lu" <hjl@lucon.org> wrote:
>
> > +# FIXME: libiberty doesn't support --disable-static
> > +enable_static=yes
>
> You shouldn't need this in general. AM_DISABLE_SHARED should take
> care of implicitly enabling static, unless --disable-static is
> actually given in the command line. If libiberty absolutely needs the
> static libiberty.a, then I can see why you'd want this (but I'd at
> least print a warning); otherwise, I'd just leave it alone, and if
> someone configures with --disable-static, they get what they asked
> for.
>
Apparently, they do
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19072
and expect --disable-static to work.
H.J.