On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Basile STARYNKEVITCH
> H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Basile STARYNKEVITCH
>> <basile@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Rainer Orth wrote:
>>>> Basile STARYNKEVITCH <basile@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>>> The answer use --whole-archive is not adequate, unless the
>>>>> option is available on every system on which GCC wants to permit
>> Why not build/install libiberty.so for plugin.
> I am not sure to understand your proposal (which seems ambigous).
> The good way would be, when GCC has plugin enabled, to install libiberty.so
> and to have *cc1 linked* to this shared library. Unfortunately I believe
> this solution has been considered and not accepted (because it would add yet
> another dependency to executing cc1).
> What won't work is to install libiberty.so but still have cc1 linking the
> static libiberty.a, as explained in
> So what did you (H.J.Lu) meant by "install libiberty for the plugin"?
You can install libiberty.so without linking it against cc1 while your
plugin can link against libiberty.so if needed.