[gccsdk] -lOSLlib and -static no go

Alan Buckley alan_baa at hotmail.com
Mon Oct 7 01:16:43 PDT 2013


Ron wrote on Sent: Monday, Oct 07, 2013 1:32 AM:

> I now think that putting a lib such as libOSLib.a in SharedLibs is only
> appropriate if nonstatic output is required. A better place for added
> libraries seems to be in !GCC.arm-unknown-riscos.lib and then there is
> no need for -LOSLib: and setvars at all.
> A nice touch would be to have a !StaticLibs app (Sprite etc) inside
> !GCC that simply filer_open 's  the dir so there is no future confusion
> to placement and as a reminder to take them forward when renewing !GCC.
> I think this was the attraction to  use !SharedLibs in the first place,
> (one familiar place for libraries)

> Libraries are also found in !GCC.libs, but on the same level,
> !GCC.include is no good for finding oslib/xxx.h so I'm going with
> !GCC.arm_unknown_riscos.
> By putting the oslib directory of h/HDR's in
> !GCC.arm-unknown-riscos.include
> They are found either with <oslib/xx.h> or "oslib/xx.h" and once again,
> no setvars required. Some oslib .h files reference other oslib files
> with "oslib/xxh" so it is necessary for that form to work also, but
> there wont be an error from using <oslib/xx.h> either so its a win win.

> I'm not saying that the packaged method for installing oslib wont work,
> I just think what I have described will be simpler across the board
> and there is less to do/go wrong in the Makefile or gcc commands.

> Cheers Ron M.

The problem with OSLib is that there are several versions for
different compile options (e.g. module, soft-float etc) and it
is set up with them all having the same name so the correct
one does currently need to be selected with an Obey file as
you can't copy them all into the same directory.

Although I could be convinced otherwise, I do like the way
RISC OS libraries are set up much like applications with
the include, library and documentation in the same
place. I've never found it too much of a problem to ensure
they are booted, but I can see how that is an extra step.
One thing about using application directories I have found
useful is being able to double-click on them so I can select
a particular version.

Regards,
Alan

(Sorry Ron I posted it just to you instead of the list by
mistake first time).





More information about the gcc mailing list