C++ :: Singleton Destruction Order

I've been upkeeping a mess of a code recently, that uses "pseudo" singletons. Basically, the current code has "Initialize_All" static functions that initializes all the singletons in a given order. At the end of the program, we call "Destroy_All", and destroy everything in the reverse order.

The code is actually heavilly dll'ed, and Initilize_All and Destory_All are referenced counted. We ask that any client who uses our code call Initialize_All first and then Destroy_All when they are finished. The first Initilize_All will initialize everything, and the last Destory_All will delete everything.

This is showing its limits.

I'd like to move us to a fully singleton design. The singleton pattern means we don't have to use an Initilize_All, and each singleton can manage construction dependencies by itself (we are mono-threaded).

Each singleton is "clean", so it is cleans itself up at dll destruction.

The big question is this one:

If there is a singleton dependency during destruction, eg: ~A requires an instance of singleton B (which is in another DLL), are we guaranteed proper behavior?

Or, is there an "Static de-initialization order fiasco"?

If yes, are there any design that can combat this fiasco, short of having each singleton register itself in a manager, that will destroy them in reverse order?