address@hidden: Re: New flag -XCClinker

[Albert Chin]

On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 08:32:20PM -0600, Robert Boehne wrote:
> In this case I'm using Compaq cxx under Tru64 with
> "-nolibcxx -nocxxstd".  These two flags are only
> relevant to linking, and the cxx compiler ignores
> them unless it is invoked to link.  Having both of these
> flags on when linking a library is a good thing,
> -nolibcxx prevents linking with old IO streams
> (we want the new ones) and -nocxxstd with this compiler
> prevents linking the static only libcxxstd.a.
> When linking an executable, as some AC_TRY_* macros do,
> both of these flags together will prevent any c++ runtime
> from being used.  That causes all tests (where linking
> is needed) to fail.  By setting CXXFLAGS, Libtool
> will propogate these two flags down to the link
> step, but not when piecewise linking is invoked.
> Because the linker doesn't recognize either flag, they
> can't be added with -Wl, or -Xlinker.
>   In short, I thought it would be an improvement to have
> a command switch in Libtool that would pass a link-specific
> flag directly to the compiler driver, just like -Xlinker
> but without -Wl, appended to it.  I could have found
> other ways around this, but it seemed to me that the
> -XCClinker flag would often be useful to others.

Are you using -XCClinker in combination with autoconf? If so, how do
you specify -XCClinker (same question for -Xlinker). I would imagine
CXXFLAGS="-XCClinker -nolibcxx -XCClinker -nocxxstd" would also cause
all tests to fail. Does specifying -Xlinker [option] pass -Wl,[option]
to the linker? If so, is that correct?

I understand the difference between the "compiler driver" and
"linker". However, if they are the same (in most cases for C++), then
shouldn't -Xlinker options be passed to the compiler driver without
$wl?

-- 
albert chin (address@hidden)