[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: libtool crap [Re: SDL c102 transition]

On Fri, 2003-03-14 at 15:38, Steve Langasek wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 02:24:26PM +0000, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > > > Look, no dep trawling...
> > > > virus lttest% objdump -p .libs/test | grep NEEDED
> > > >   NEEDED      libb.so.0
> > > >   NEEDED      libc.so.6
> > > Is it possible to get your patched version of libtool ? Also, are there
> > > some hacks to achieve that with current libtool ?
> > Of course you may have the patch, especially if you plan to find out
> > whether this does the right thing or not.
> > The patch does the following:
> > 1) If the OS is Linux then set link_all_deplibs to "no" rather than
> >    "unknown".  Nothing else sets this to "no", so it should only
> >    change Linux behaviour.
> > 2) Don't set dependency_libs if link_all_deplibs is "no".  This means
> >    that the dependency_libs line in the .la file will be empty, because
> >    the linker can handle it.  It *ALSO* means that the dependency_libs
> >    line from .la files will not be considered when linking (ie you don't
> >    need to recompile everything on your system).
> > I'm almost positive this will break things, so be very very careful. 
> > Don't just apply this because you like the idea, if you're going to use
> > this patch *ASSUME* your software will be broken, and test very very
> > hard accordingly.
> From your description, it sounds like this will break anything trying to
> use the .la file for the list of dependencies of the static lib.  If this
> is not the case, I don't see anything else that would be broken by such a
> change.
Yeah it would :S  unfortunately libtool doesn't really distinguish
static and shared libraries until the last minute, might need to stick
some code in so that dependency_libs is still dropped into the .la, but
just not loaded if it's intending to link it as shared.

Will give me something to do on the train home :-)

Scott James Remnant     Have you ever, ever felt like this?  Had strange
http://netsplit.com/      things happen?  Are you going round the twist?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: