From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.ai.mit.edu>
To: ian@cygnus.com
Cc: hjl@nynexst.com, dholland@husc.harvard.edu, gas2@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: problems with ld from binutils 2.5.2l.20
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 1995 13:05:00 -0000
Message-id: <199509112004.QAA14727@mole.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
References: <199509111934.PAA19698@sanguine.cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 1995/msg00165.html

    Support you run
	ld -Lfoo -lfoo -Lbar -lbar
    The proposed change appears to argue that the -Lbar should not apply
    to the -lfoo.  However, that only matters if foo/libfoo.a does not
    exist.

That is true.

What this shows is that even if the order of options were not rearranged,
the -L feature is insufficient for controlling which libraries are used,
for the reason that it can only add to the end of the search list.

So I guess we might as well not change this unless/until we also make
it powerful enough to alter the search list in more flexible ways.
I don't know of an urgent need to do that.