On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 03:35:37PM +0100, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: > Okay to commit? > > Make a start at a test group for checking that backwards compatibility > with configure.in calls to our old m4 interface does not regress.
Ok, I'm too much of a libtool newbie to understand the details of that, but the test appears to be designed to test the m4 interface... *snip* > +AT_DATA([Makefile.in], > +[[COMPILE = @CC@ @CPPFLAGS@ @CFLAGS@ > +LINK = @CC@ @CFLAGS@ @LDFLAGS@ -o $@ > + > +all: [EMAIL PROTECTED]@ > + > [EMAIL PROTECTED]@: [EMAIL PROTECTED]@ > + $(LINK) [EMAIL PROTECTED]@ > + > [EMAIL PROTECTED]@: > + $(COMPILE) -c $< > +]]) Can we not use libtool compile/link mode instead so that the test does not break with my MSVC patches? I mean, since the test is for the m4 interface, or is this somehow part of the m4 interface? *snip* > +AT_DATA([Makefile.in], > +[[INCLUDES = -I./libltdl > +COMPILE = @CC@ @CPPFLAGS@ $(INCLUDES) @CFLAGS@ > +LTCOMPILE = @LIBTOOL@ --mode=compile $(COMPILE) > +LTLINK = @LIBTOOL@ --mode=link @CC@ @CFLAGS@ @LDFLAGS@ -o $@ > + > +TARGETS = libltdl/libltdlc.la module.la [EMAIL PROTECTED]@ > + > +all: $(TARGETS) > + > +libltdl/libltdlc.la: > + cd libltdl && ./configure && $(MAKE) > + > +module.la: module.lo > + $(LTLINK) module.lo -rpath /dev/null > + > [EMAIL PROTECTED]@: [EMAIL PROTECTED]@ > + $(LTLINK) [EMAIL PROTECTED]@ -dlopen module.la ./libltdl/libltdlc.la > + > [EMAIL PROTECTED]@: > + $(COMPILE) -c $< > + Dito. > +.c.lo: > + $(LTCOMPILE) -c -o $@ $< > +]]) > + *snip* The other issue I found was the checking of stdout, which does not seem to be portable, but I think Ralf covered that in his review. Cheers, Peter
