Re: New acinclude.m4

From: "Adam H(dot) Pendleton" <fmonkey(at)fmonkey(dot)net>
To: Raphaël Enrici <blacknoz(at)club-internet(dot)fr>
Cc: "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: New acinclude.m4
Date: 2005-05-19 20:41:21
Message-ID: 2FF78D95-98EC-4528-BA89-013550E7E82F@fmonkey.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgadmin-hackers


On May 19, 2005, at 4:30 PM, Raphaël Enrici wrote:

> Adam H. Pendleton wrote:
>
> I'm glad to be so "rare"... It seems I belong to the 1%: I have a
> dynamic build. ;)
> Please also note that the patch attached reintroduce your code
> concerning the static link of the rest of the libs (libpq and sons).
>
> However, you are the ac guru and I'm fully satisfied by a dynamic
> linking with the new acinclude.m4 (+ the configure.ac patch).
> The real question is:
> - do we still need "full" static linking (at least libpq, ssl,..?).
>
> If yes, then the new acinclude.m4 does not provide it anymore and we
> need to rework on it.

Are you saying that `wx-config --libs` and `wx-config --libs --
static` produce two different outputs on your system? If you built
wx dynamically then either a) the output from --libs --static is
nonsense, or b) it's the same as --libs. Either way, the current
acinclude will link the same way you linked wx.

As for the full static linking, --enable-static never performed a
full static link, it only statically linked against wxWindows.
Personally, I don't like static linking. It creates huge
executables, eats up memory, and slows down performance. We should
link dynamically wherever possible.

ahp

In response to

Responses

Browse pgadmin-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Raphaël Enrici 2005-05-19 20:54:37 Re: New acinclude.m4
Previous Message Raphaël Enrici 2005-05-19 20:30:43 Re: New acinclude.m4