Re: [xml] Generating a correct xml2-config for use with --libs

[Gary Pennington <Gary Pennington sun com>]

THIS IS SOLARIS AND DYNAMIC LINKING SPECIFIC

Once again, you DON'T need to list library dependencies on Solaris, just 
because libxml2 is dependant on a library when you are doing dynamic 
linking.

So, it isn't a bad idea for the reason you gave. It may be a bad idea 
for other reasons.

Your description of "*the same* Makefiles on all platforms" is a fantasy 
anyway, since there is no way that this can be true for anything but the 
simplest of applications. In fact, by listing unrequired dependancines 
on Solaris to libraries that your application does not depend on, your 
makefile is (in some sense) incorrect.

Let me be clear, you should only link your application with -lsocket if 
your application needs access to a member of libsocket. Otherwise you 
are creating a completely unneccessary dependancy on a library that your 
application doesn't directly depend on.

You are approaching this problem the wrong way round. If your 
application doesn't use a library, it should explicitly link to it.

Gary

Aleksey Sanin wrote:

> As one of Solaris users for LibXML I would strongly disagree with this 
> idea.
> I would like to have *the same* Makefiles on all platforms and I do 
> not see reasons
> why I need to add -lsocket for Solaris manually.
> If your application does not use threads or networking you may 
> configure/compile
> LibXMLby yourself and use --without-http, --without-ftp, etc. flags to 
> remove
> these dependencies. In case you use *shared* library compiled for 
> general use
> you would probably want to use linker that can trace dependencies and 
> ignore
> libraries not actually used.
>
> Aleksey
>
>
> > I'm also apologizing for generating so much noise over such a small 
> > thing.
> >
> > I hadn't realised that it wasn't clear that I was referring only to 
> > dynamic linking. (Actually, I hadn't even considered that anyone 
> > would bother with static linking in this day and age.)
> >
> > I'll consider making this a Solaris specific patch as Daniel suggests.
> >
> > Gary