On 2016-02-02, Arkadiusz Drabczyk <arkadi...@drabczyk.org> wrote:
> On 2016-02-02, Sandra Loosemore <san...@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> I see that the documentation of -l does need to be updated to mention
>> .so files, but I think your patch doesn't go far enough. It's already
>> confusing because that sentence says "The only difference is...", and
>> then mentions *two* things it does differently, and you're adding even
>> more things.
>>
>> Instead, I suggest dropping this confusing sentence entirely and putting
>> the new information a couple paragraphs higher up:
>>
>>> The linker searches a standard list of directories for the library,
>>> which is actually a file named @file{lib@var{library}.a}. The linker
>>> then uses this file as if it had been specified precisely by name.
>>
>> How about just changing that to read
>>
>> ...a file named @file{lib@var{library}.so}; or, if shared libraries are
>> not supported, are disabled via @option{-static}, or no @samp{.so} file
>> is found, @file{lib@var{library}.a}.
>
> Nice, indeed, more readable than what I came up with plus info on
> -static added. Looks good to me.
>
Hello,
What's the status of this patch? Will it be merged into trunk?
--
Arkadiusz Drabczyk <arkadi...@drabczyk.org>
