From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: pkurpis@keck.hawaii.edu (Peter Kurpis)
To: carlanunes@yahoo.com
Cc: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: gcc compile options
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 11:33:00 -0000
Message-id: <200107061833.IAA15282@kalani.keck.hawaii.edu>
X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg00097.html

> I have one more question regarding the creation of a
> shared library...
> 
> Should I use the g++ command with the -Wl options or
> can I use the ld command directly? Which one is
> better?

In general, I think  g++ -shared  is more convenient,
because it silently includes  libstdc++.so.* , for
instance.  But I think either can be used, although
to be honest, I've not used nor seen  ld  used to
build shared libs from c++ modules.

(When creating an executable,  gcc  and  g++  are even
more handy, since they link in the startup module 
(usually called something like  crt.o ), etcetera,
whereas with  ld , I think you'd have to be explicit
about these things.)

BTW, you may need to use  -fpic  when compiling source
code that you plan to link into a shared lib.

One way to see how things are commonly done on your
system is to examine native makefiles.  Besides looking
at them with an editor, you can also (with GNU make,
which you probably have on your system) do e.g.

	make -np | grep "^CPPFLAGS"

to see how  CPPFLAGS  is defined.  (The  -n  turns off
any actual building.)  Or, you can see how a particular
target would be build (again, without actually building
anything) with e.g.

	make -n mylib.so

assuming there's a target called  mylib.so .