On Fri, Mar 12, 2004 at 01:25:15PM -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Fri, 12 Mar 2004, Fredrick Meunier wrote: > > > Hi, > > I have just come across the same problem raised in the thread "Library > > dependencies & make install" on the automake lists in January this year > > (<http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/automake/2004-01/msg00145.html>) in a > > reasonably large project. > > > > The last message in the thread from Alexandre Duret-Lutz suggests: > > "Another idea is to split the installation procedure in two > > steps: copy all libraries, and once it is done relink all > > libraries. Would that work? If so, we need a way to tell > > libtool to copy libraries without relinking." > > The fundamental problem is that Automake does not have an overall > coherent understanding of the library dependencies when libraries are > built using a recursive build. Without understanding the library > dependencies, it is difficult to see how relinking would work.
Why not just have the developer write a Makefile.am so the libraries are built/installed in the correct order? -- albert chin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) _______________________________________________ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
