[tor-bugs] #23846 [Core Tor/Tor]: Use libtool for building shared library

[Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki]

#23846: Use libtool for building shared library
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
 Reporter:  hellais                              |          Owner:  nickm
     Type:  enhancement                          |         Status:
                                                 |  accepted
 Priority:  Medium                               |      Milestone:  Tor:
                                                 |  0.3.5.x-final
Component:  Core Tor/Tor                         |        Version:
 Severity:  Normal                               |     Resolution:
 Keywords:  tor-mobile, s8-api,                  |  Actual Points:
  034-triage-20180328, 034-included-20180402,    |
  034-roadmap-subtask, 035-roadmap-subtask, 035  |
  -triaged-in-20180711                           |
Parent ID:  #25510                               |         Points:
 Reviewer:  ahf                                  |        Sponsor:
                                                 |  Sponsor8
-------------------------------------------------+-------------------------

Comment (by sbs):

 > Instead of a single static library, would a target that gives you a list
 of all the static libraries you need be acceptable?

 Yes, that would be acceptable!

 > [...] all the libraries you need to link for tor, in the correct order,

 This is especially useful because I was not super happy having to keep
 track of the correct order, especially in the future when switching to new
 releases; but having an authoritative source for the names and order is
 great.

 Is is correct to say that the reason why different `.a` libraries are
 built in tor, as opposed to a single library, is that you need to apply
 different compiler flags to different portions of the code base, or is
 there another reason?

 > [...] because Cargo builds its libraries as .lib rather than .a.

 Yeah, using non portable tricks was making me a little nervous because I
 feared something I was most likely not aware of could break.

 Curiosity: does this imply that rust produces binaries compatible with the
 format of MSVC as opposed to the one of GCC? Does this imply that MinGW is
 not used anymore for Windows, or is MinGW now able to cope with the format
 of MSVC?

 Thank you!

--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/23846#comment:42>
Tor Bug Tracker & Wiki <https://trac.torproject.org/>
The Tor Project: anonymity online