On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Basile STARYNKEVITCH
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Rainer Orth wrote:
>> Basile STARYNKEVITCH <[email protected]> writes:
>>> The answer use --whole-archive is not adequate, unless the
>>> option is available on every system on which GCC wants to permit
>>> plugins. If that is the case (I really don't know), then we should
>>> that option, or any other way of making libiberty available, into the GCC
>>> core! This probably means a Makefile.in patch at least, and probably a
>>> configure.ac patch also.
>> Why not just build PIC objects from libiberty,
> This was already explained by Ralf Wildenhues
> In short: mixing a statically linked function with a dynamically linked
> variant of the same function accessing static variables is an "oportunity
> for subtle bugs". And the point is that libiberty provide several such
Why not build/install libiberty.so for plugin.