Pass -lfoo to linker rather than -l foo. #51197
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
The job Click to expand the log.I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
|
Whoops, I got two similar lines of code mixed up and changed the wrong one. Fixed. |
|
The job Click to expand the log.I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
|
Ping from triage, @michaelwoerister ! |
|
Looks good but seems to have compilation errors still. |
shepmaster
added
S-waiting-on-author
|
@comex, This PR failed travis, do you think you'll be able to look into that? |
|
Thank you for this PR @comex! Unfortunately we haven't heard from you on this in a while, so I'm closing the PR to keep things tidy. Don't worry though, if you'll have time again in the future please reopen this PR, we'll be happy to review it again! |
pietroalbini
added
S-inactive
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When invoking the linker and trying to link against a specific library, rustc currently passes
-l fooas two separate arguments, rather than the more common syntax-lfoo. GCC, Clang, and GNU ld all support-l foo, but Darwin ld64 does not. By default, rustc currently uses the C compiler as its linker on all platforms (other than wasm), so it passes-l footoclang, which then transforms it to-lfoowhen invokingld. However, if you try to pass-C linker=ld– or, more usefully,-C linker=ld64.lld– it gets confused. Since-lfoois the preferred form on all Unix platforms, use it everywhere.As a side benefit, this makes printed linker command lines significantly more succinct, given that rustc wraps every argument in quotes, so you currently get things like
"-l" "System" "-l" "resolv" "-l" "pthread" "-l" "c" "-l" "m". (Of course, this could be improved further by omitting the quotes entirely for arguments that don't contain spaces.)This PR is simply a plagiarized subset of PR #46255, written by tamird, which @alexcrichton requested to be deferred until #48125 landed – something that's since happened. Actually, everything in that PR seems necessary for linking using
ld64directly to work properly, but since I'm not the original author, I'm too lazy to convince myself that it's all correct. Landing this by itself will at least make some basic cases work.