[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] OpenBSD -pthread fix
From: |
Cezary Kaliszyk |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] OpenBSD -pthread fix |
Date: |
Sun, 21 Sep 2003 16:22:21 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.1i |
On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 09:11:57AM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Sep 2003, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
> > > ;;
> > > + -pthread)
> > > + deplibs="$deplib $deplibs"
> > > + continue
> > > + ;;
> >
> > Hi,
> > I think this needs a little more discussion. Older versions of libtool
> > put all kinds of things into dependency_libs, although we could add
> > individual flags like this to accept them, I don't believe it is
> > appropriate.
> >
> > So the question is:
> > Should we just ignore unknown stuff in dependency_libs (perhaps issue a
> > warning), or just take the flags and pass them through to the linker,
> > assuming they are okay?
>
> If options like -pthread are not passed through then the link may fail
> or produce the wrong result since -pthread may secretly add libraries,
> or change the entire library selection logic. I have developed for an
> OS (LynxOS) which provided a completely different set of libraries if
> -pthread was specified
On openBSD/i386 -pthread is treated by `ld` just like -lpthread, but
all libraries that have -pthread in dependencies also link to libpthread
either explicitely or via other dependencies, so it doesn't matter.
But if it does matter, the correct code should perheapes be even like:
-pthread)
deplibs="$deplib $deplibs"
compile_deplibs="$deplib $compile_deplibs"
finalize_deplibs="$deplib $finalize_deplibs"
continue
;;
Cezary Kaliszyk