[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Android (Was: Cross-compiling GNUstep?)

From: David Chisnall
Subject: Re: Android (Was: Cross-compiling GNUstep?)
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2013 11:50:38 +0000

On 30 Dec 2013, at 10:58, Ivan Vučica <address@hidden> wrote:

> Still, if one wants to build separate libobjc, could you look into forcing 
> soname to be just "", solely for the Android platform? If I 
> understand the CMake way of thinking, that should be done in the toolchain 
> specification file, right?

The version extension is set by the SOVERSION target property, which is used to 
define the extension.  If you can give me a way of detecting that Android is 
the target, then it's easy to either not set this, or explicitly set the 
NO_SONAME target property to true (which has the same effect).  

> Even before I read the entire mail the first thought that came to me was the 
> legal issues with LGPL. :-)
> And single does sound like a good approach for any proprietary 
> apps. 
> We could support 3 scenarios:
> - fully statically linked with app (with a big label about advantages plus 
> about legal requirements)
> - statically linked up to
> - every library for itself

I'm not sure that there's any advantage in the last one, to be honest.  With 
the statically linked, we get the possibility of doing LTO (which 
should reduce binary sizes, which is probably a good thing for Android!) and of 
doing more of the relocations statically so that we will get faster startup 


-- Sent from my Apple II

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]