jsj,
seems like the problem is not in GCC, or at least not in CPU architecture.
I did some experiments and the static lib (libtiff.a) produced by GCC is different
when you use "-arch i386" than with no flags. 64bit one is roughly 2x bigger in size
than 32bit one.
Also FPC gives this message:
ld: warning: ignoring file ./libtiff64.a, file was built for archive which is not the architecture being linked (i386)
when trying to link to x86_64 library.
This message is not displayed when linking library generated with "-arch i386".
Anyway, for both libraries linking always ends with:
Undefined symbols for architecture i386:
"_TiffGetVersion", referenced from:
Maybe symbols are not properly exported or something :(
seems like the problem is not in GCC, or at least not in CPU architecture.
I did some experiments and the static lib (libtiff.a) produced by GCC is different
when you use "-arch i386" than with no flags. 64bit one is roughly 2x bigger in size
than 32bit one.
Also FPC gives this message:
ld: warning: ignoring file ./libtiff64.a, file was built for archive which is not the architecture being linked (i386)
when trying to link to x86_64 library.
This message is not displayed when linking library generated with "-arch i386".
Anyway, for both libraries linking always ends with:
Undefined symbols for architecture i386:
"_TiffGetVersion", referenced from:
Maybe symbols are not properly exported or something :(
