Russ Allbery <[email protected]> writes:

> "Dr. David Kirkby" <[email protected]> writes:
>> I'd rather not use libtool - I don't want to learn yet another
>> tool. Especially since it has already caused me some grief on Solaris.
>
> I used to feel that way, but I'm personally switching everything over to
> it, particularly as I have access to fewer and fewer platforms myself.  I
> don't think it provides as much portability in some cases as hand-tuned
> linker flags, but unless one has access to a ton of different systems,
> it's hard to hand-tune the flags in all the ways needed.
>
> However, lintian still doesn't solve all the problems.  For example, all
> the flags I mentioned in my previous message are ones that lintian has no
> API for, so you still have to figure out what flags to pass to the
> underlying linker.  Lintian's Autoconf probes do help a bit because
> lintian has to check for things like whether the GNU linker is in use
> itself.
>
> You could also steal code from lintian's Autoconf probes without using it
> directly.  I've done that before for some projects.

I think that many (but perhaps not all) of the instances of
"lintian" above should actually refer to "libtool".
-- 
"Long noun chains don't automatically imply security."
--Bruce Schneier



_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf

Reply via email to