Welcome to ShenZhenJia Knowledge Sharing Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
menu search
person
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

Categories

The only real use of the --whole-archive linker option that I have seen is in creating shared libraries from static ones. Recently I came across Makefile(s) which always use this option when linking with in house static libraries. This of course causes the executables to unnecessarily pull in unreferenced object code. My reaction to this was that this is plain wrong, am I missing something here ?

The second question I have has to do with something I read regarding the whole-archive option but couldn't quite parse. Something to the effect that --whole-archive option should be used while linking with a static library if the executable also links with a shared library which in turn has (in part) the same object code as the static library. That is the shared library and the static library have overlap in terms of object code. Using this option would force all symbols(regardless of use) to be resolved in the executable. This is supposed to avoid object code duplication. This is confusing, if a symbol is refereed in the program it must be resolved uniquely at link time, what is this business about duplication ? (Forgive me if this paragraph is not quite the epitome of clarity)

Thanks

Question&Answers:os

与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
thumb_up_alt 0 like thumb_down_alt 0 dislike
1.1k views
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

1 Answer

There are legitimate uses of --whole-archive when linking executable with static libraries. One example is building C++ code, where global instances "register" themselves in their constructors (warning: untested code):

handlers.h

typedef void (*handler)(const char *data);
void register_handler(const char *protocol, handler h);
handler get_handler(const char *protocol);

handlers.cc (part of libhandlers.a)

typedef map<const char*, handler> HandlerMap;
HandlerMap m;
void register_handler(const char *protocol, handler h) {
   m[protocol] = h;
}
handler get_handler(const char *protocol) {
   HandlerMap::iterator it = m.find(protocol);
   if (it == m.end()) return nullptr;
   return it->second;
}

http.cc (part of libhttp.a)

#include <handlers.h>
class HttpHandler {
    HttpHandler() { register_handler("http", &handle_http); }
    static void handle_http(const char *) { /* whatever */ }
};
HttpHandler h; // registers itself with main!

main.cc

#include <handlers.h>
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    for (int i = 1; i < argc-1; i+= 2) {
        handler h = get_handler(argv[i]);
        if (h != nullptr) h(argv[i+1]);
    }
}

Note that there are no symbols in http.cc that main.cc needs. If you link this as

g++ main.cc -lhttp -lhandlers

you will not get an http handler linked into the main executable, and will not be able to call handle_http(). Contrast this with what happens when you link as:

g++ main.cc -Wl,--whole-archive -lhttp -Wl,--no-whole-archive -lhandlers

The same "self registration" style is also possible in plain-C, e.g. with the __attribute__((constructor)) GNU extension.


与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
thumb_up_alt 0 like thumb_down_alt 0 dislike
Welcome to ShenZhenJia Knowledge Sharing Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
...