Re: [AD] Stripping libraries

[Peter Wang <tjaden@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2003-05-11, Eric <ebotcazou@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Patched thusly on trunk and branch.
> 
> @@ -198,9 +197,6 @@
>  else
>    COMPILE_PROGRAM=COMPILE_NORMAL
>    COMPILE_S_PROGRAM=COMPILE_S_NORMAL
> -  if test "X$allegro_cv_prog_ld_s" = "Xyes"; then
> -    LDFLAGS="-s $LDFLAGS"
> -  fi
>    LIB_TO_LINK=alleg
>    PLUGIN_LIB=lib/unix/libaldat.a
>    allegro_build_normal_library=yes
> 
> 
> Isn't that a big hammer?

Yes, attributed to laziness.

> Now we don't strip anything, including the optimized 
> shared lib which deserves IMHO to be stripped. And note that we have the 
> same problem (a link-time option for programs gets passed to every shared 
> lib) with the "-pg" that Elias added very recently.

I was meaning to check how that was handled.

> Can't we split LDFLAGS into a base LDFLAGS (suited to every shared linking) 
> and a PROGRAM_LDFLAGS suited only to programs? Then each shared lib would be 
> responsible for appending its own specialized option (-pg, -s, -g).

Fine.

For the profiling switch, would we make allegro-config --cflags
dependent on the libraries argument?  For example, `allegro-config
--cflags profile` could include the `-pg' switch.

-- 
王浩禎