On 2003-07-07(Mon) 19:49:08 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
Does this mean that things are more likely to be corrected if test cases
are added?
Yes, of course. Without minimal tests which exercize the necessary
operations, the libtool maintainer is forced to assume that his
changes are
On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 08:42:14PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
R For several _YEARS_, packagers for software were very troubled because
R of not-completely-working staging install. I really hope this issue can
R be sorted out, once and for all.
One
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 02:09:40PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
Bernd Jendrissek wrote:
I realise this may be an FAQ candidate, but I haven't gotten any joy out
of google or the mail.gnu.org archives.
My problem:
I have, say, guile 1.4 installed, with libguile.so.9 in /usr/lib. Now
On 2003-07-06(Sun) 11:08:58 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
There is a catch-22 with this approach in that adding
-L$inst_prefix_dir to the front of the linker search path may cause
the wrong dependency libraries to be used, which is just as bad as
picking up the wrong target library. The
On 2003-07-06(Sun) 11:08:58 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
There is a catch-22 with this approach in that adding
-L$inst_prefix_dir to the front of the linker search path may cause
the wrong dependency libraries to be used, which is just as bad as
picking up the wrong target library. The
R == R I P Deaddog [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
R For several _YEARS_, packagers for software were very troubled because
R of not-completely-working staging install. I really hope this issue can
R be sorted out, once and for all.
One way to address the once for all part would be to write
On 2003-07-07(Mon) 23:03:24 +0200, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
R For several _YEARS_, packagers for software were very troubled because
R of not-completely-working staging install. I really hope this issue can
R be sorted out, once and for all.
One way to address the once for all part
Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
R For several _YEARS_, packagers for software were very troubled because
R of not-completely-working staging install. I really hope this issue can
R be sorted out, once and for all.
One way to address the once for all part would be to write a
test case.
I don't
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Abel Cheung wrote:
On 2003-07-07(Mon) 23:03:24 +0200, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
R For several _YEARS_, packagers for software were very troubled because
R of not-completely-working staging install. I really hope this issue can
R be sorted out, once and for all.
Bernd Jendrissek wrote:
I get this:
/tmp/destdir-relinklib-demo-1.0.1: LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/tmp/relinkdemo/usr/lib ldd /tmp/relinkdemo/usr/lib/libtwo.so.1.1.1
libone.so.2 = /tmp/relinkdemo/usr/lib/libone.so.2 (0x40002000)
libgcc_s.so.1 = /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x40012000)
On 2003-07-05(Sat) 14:09:40 -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
Other than identifying the problem, I don't really know how to correct
the remaining issue. But in this message
http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool/2003-05/msg00022.html
I posted a test case that demonstrates the issue; if
On Sun, 6 Jul 2003, Abel Cheung wrote:
On 2003-07-05(Sat) 14:09:40 -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
Other than identifying the problem, I don't really know how to correct
the remaining issue. But in this message
http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool/2003-05/msg00022.html
I posted a
Bernd Jendrissek wrote:
I realise this may be an FAQ candidate, but I haven't gotten any joy out
of google or the mail.gnu.org archives.
My problem:
I have, say, guile 1.4 installed, with libguile.so.9 in /usr/lib. Now
I've tried to build guile 1.6.4 with a DESTDIR=foo install, but then
things
I realise this may be an FAQ candidate, but I haven't gotten any joy out
of google or the mail.gnu.org archives.
My problem:
I have, say, guile 1.4 installed, with libguile.so.9 in /usr/lib. Now
I've tried to build guile 1.6.4 with a DESTDIR=foo install, but then
things get linked with the
14 matches
Mail list logo
