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