Hi Bruno, * Bruno Haible wrote on Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 01:36:35PM CET: > > One more question about this macro: What is the difference between > -Xlinker and -Wl (apart from the slightly different syntax)? libtool and > config.rpath sometimes use -Wl to pass an option to the linker and never > -Xlinker,
This is true for config.rpath, but not for libtool, on both the receiving (input to libtool) and the output side (the command line libtool generates). > whereas your macro uses sometimes -Xlinker and never -Wl. > It appears that -Xlinker is supported only by gcc, and -Wl by other > compilers too? Both are supported by a number of compilers. Neither are supported by all compilers. Likely, for some useful measures, -Wl, is supported by more compilers. > > I looked into doing this, and ran into some problems. > > LDDPOSTPROC is set in such a way that configure needs to employ 'eval' > > to use it, and then I ran into porting problems when using things like > > 'eval "$LDDPROG ... $LDDPOSTPROC"' since LDDPROG began "LC_ALL=C ..." > > The variables were not meant to be used with eval, just to be used > without quotes, like this: > $LDDPROG program $LDDPOSTPROC I tried to explain this before: the shell does the splitting into commands before it does variable expansion. Thus, a `|' (pipe) symbol in a variable won't do what you intend, namely create a process pipe, unless you use `eval'. And if you use eval with the current ldd module, information from $LDDPOSTPROC will be lost due to missing or plainly wrong-for-eval quotation (e.g., white space information). Cheers, Ralf _______________________________________________ bug-gnulib mailing list bug-gnulib@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnulib