-L-ldl needed on Linux

[Bill Baxter]

Spacen Jasset wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> Just wondering why I have to give dsss the -L-ldl flag manually when I 
>> compile a Derelict-using program under Linux.
>>
>> Seems like it shouldn't be neecessary for me to have to specify that. 
>> But who's to blame?
>> * Is it DMD's fault for not including in the default link libs?
>> * Is it DSSS's fault for not picking up that it's needed (or for not 
>> puttin it in the default list of flags?)
>> * Is it Derelict's fault for somehow not telling DSSS that it wants to 
>> use libdl on Linux?
>>
>> Any of those seem possible.  So anyone know the answer?
>>
>> Or is it just my fault for thinking I shouldn't have to stick a 
>> version(linux) block in my dsss.conf file?
>>
>> --bb
> 
> It's sort of the Linux way I guess. You have to do this using C++ to use 
> any of the dynamic binding functions. A dsss link pragma seems to be the 
> solution for the moment. Or, you can list lib 'dl' in your dsss.conf and 
> you will get a warning on windows but it will still link correctly.
> 
> buildflags=-g -lldl -debug -unittest -Dddocs -profile
> 
> 
> OPTLINK (R) for Win32  Release 8.00.1
> Copyright (C) Digital Mars 1989-2004  All rights reserved.
> dl.lib
>  Warning 2: File Not Found dl.lib
> 

Mike/Aldacron added the link pragma to Derelict's svn yesterday.  So at 
least with DSSS (and bud I think) the -L-ldl is no longer needed for 
building programs with Derelict.

--bb