This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Patching autoconf to support static binutils? - SOLVED
On 08/25/11 12:51, Bryan Ischo wrote:
On 08/24/11 10:13, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Wednesday, August 24, 2011 12:33:28 Bryan Ischo wrote:
On 08/24/11 09:03, Mike Frysinger wrote:
OK I will try again and take a harder look at why it is failing for me.
that's what "free" gets you
Additionally, it is disappointing that you put more effort
into writing this paragraph than to your response below ...
i tested this sequence and it seemed to work just fine for me. gcc
If you'll read my original email you'll note that the above
because LDFLAGS is passed to gcc by some of the binutils Makefiles
gcc doesn't like the -all-static option.
generally shouldnt be invoked directly by the makefiles ... the
should all be going through libtool. and they do on my system.
I apologize for any perceived impatience on my part in this exchange
I appreciate your taking the time to test the scenario and report your
OK I tried again; with your instructions, there are no errors
reported, but then again, the LDFLAGS argument is ignored and the
result is not a static build of binutils as desired.
Sorry, the cause was my own mistake. In fact your instructions *do*
produce a static binutils. I made the mistake of thinking that doing
"export LDFLAGS=-all-static" was the same as passing LDFLAGS=-all-static
to the make command, and apparently it is not. Make variables are not
picked up from the environment unless explicitly requested in the
Makefile, and I often forget that detail. The confusing thing is that
the configure script talks about using LDFLAGS from the environment,
which it does, but that doesn't mean that the subsequent make will pick
the variable up from the environment, and I should have realized that.
Using your instructions verbatim did produce static binaries.
Sorry for the noise, and thanks again for your help.