pawosm-arm wrote: > I think it makes sense to handle linker options differently so I'm in favour > of this change in principle. > > Am I right in thinking that if the config file puts things last, the `-l` > options provided by users will come before the config file ones, and unlike > other options that will lead to those libraries being chosen first? If so, I > think that's the correct way to do things anyway, so I prefer that to the > current approach of putting the ones from the config file first. It might be > considered a breaking change though. > > @mgorny's question has got me thinking and given me concerns; I think if the > user passes `-Wl,-Bstatic -lmystaticlib` and the config file is adding > `-lmydynamiclib` after that, things will fail, because the `-Bstatic` will > also apply to the lib in the config file. So we need to do something to > prevent situations like that. > > I've also added a few comments so that we can hopefully get this working for > Windows as well.
That was actually easy to fix. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/117573 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
