Re: multiply-defined symbols problem on solaris9 (libtool-1.5.18)

[Derek Feichtinger]

Hi, Ralf

thanks very much for this speedy response.

> Do you know whether -xar is safe to use for shared libraries?
> A quick glance at the docs does not reveal any clue to me.

I have too limited Solaris experience to answer that, but from what I see now 
it's probably not a good idea.

I can see now, that just doing this

CC -G -nolib -hlibXrdSec.so.0 
-o .libs/libXrdSec.so.0.0.0 .libs/XrdSecClient.o .libs/XrdSecPManager.o
 .libs/XrdSecProtocolhost.o .libs/XrdSecServer.o ../XrdOuc/.libs/libXrdOuc.a 
../XrdNet/.libs/libXrdNet.a 
...

without any kind of -QOptions also does the job (and this was actually used in 
the build system of the project which I am currently moving to autotools). I 
have dicovered some old mails on you list about the introduction of the 
QOptions with allextract, but it was in another context.

> I've started to work on supporting template libs better in Libtool.
> The CVS HEAD version has a couple of improvements, but so far only for
> the PGI compiler.  It seems, all template instantiation methods other
> than GCC's lack some flexibility in order to be used successfully with
> Libtool.
>
> If a way can be found to make it work with SUN Forte, I'd be happy to
> put it in HEAD.

Great. Thanks.

> Meanwhile, can I ask a favor of you?  We've changed the code for
> -no-undefined on Solaris, and I'd like a test with a real-world example
> C++ package before I release 1.5.20 this weekend.  Could you try it (or 
> point me to the package you're compiling so I can)? I could send you a 
> bootstrapped Libtool tarball (off-list) if you like.

Sure. I'll try to do it tomorrow morning or tonight. The bootstrapped Libtool 
tarball would be easiest for me. What should I do to test it?

Cheers,
Derek