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

Re: SUMMARY: Re: shared library -dev package naming proposal

On 28-Jul-05, 03:02 (CDT), Junichi Uekawa <dancer@netfort.gr.jp> wrote: 
> fact 1: shared library 
>   gcc -lnewt a.c

Right. No problem.

> fact 2: static library
>   gcc -lslang -lnewt a.c

Right, Just like it's always been on Unix systems.

> fact 3: libtool library
> libtool tries to implement a wrapper around shared library and 
> static library, so that both of them can be uniformly processed,
> and allows specifying just:
>   libtool cc -lnewt a.c

Why is this better? I have to change my perfectly normal, standard Unix
link command to use something that completely hides the actual link
command and makes debugging problems nearly impossible? I really don't
get it. And, for the record, the company I work for ships code for a
variety of Unices. I spend a *lot* more of my time debugging libtool
brokenness (not to mention auto* brokeness) than I do tracking down
which libraries need which other libraries. So when I say "I don't get
it", it's not lack of experience with the tools, I'm just completely
mystified why people think that libtool is an *improvement*.


Steve Greenland
    The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
    system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
    world.       -- seen on the net

Reply to: