Re: [RFC] Move static archive dependencies into ld

["Clément Chigot" <chigot@adacore.com>]

On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 9:53 PM Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com> wrote:
>
> Michael Matz via Binutils wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > this is an RFC for now.  When met with some acceptance I'll cobble up a
> > similar thing for gold as well and then make the libdep.so plugin only
> > emit a warning message that its functionality is obsoleted and moved
> > into ld itself.  As Cary put it back in 2020 when the plugin was added:
> >
> > ( https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2020-December/114536.html )
> >
> > "Did I miss any discussion about whether this feature should/could be
> > implemented directly in the linkers, rather than via a plugin? I
> > wouldn't be opposed to it."
>
> I'm all for it. I went the plugin route initially because it seemed the
> easiest way to get the feature written and accepted but I agree with you,
> it'd be much more useful if it was implicitly supported by default.

I do support this feature as well.

As seen recently, the plugin is not correctly built when shared
support is disabled. It means that a feature made to enhance static
support does not work when only static support is available...
I was planning to disable its creation (see [1]) because of potential
harmful side effects on Windows.
But this solution is far better.

Thanks Chu for pointing it out to me.

[1] https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2023-April/127045.html

Thanks,
Clément