* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Sat, Nov 27, 2004 at 07:47:35PM CET: > Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > >* Albert Chin wrote on Fri, Nov 26, 2004 at 10:09:31PM CET: > > > >My proposal: On systems with "smart linker": for every interface > >change, only update the set of libraries and programs exposed to > >this change. (That is, if we can come up with a sane set of > >semantics.) > > I'm right behind you for this one, and think that it would be a huge > value add for libtool-2.2 -- as long as we heed the caveats pointed > out by Bob.
OK. > >What's more, there is precedence here: Debian's libtool makes use of > >link_all_deplibs=no. I would like something much more conservative > >than this overall trust in library authors, but something better > >than having libtool guess what ultimatively cannot be guessed. > > s/precedence/precedent/ (prod me if you hate having your grammar > corrected, like wot I do, and I'll stop it) On the contrary. See below. > >Actually, I also believe that it's a good thing to support the > >enhanced features that a GNU system (which GNU libtool is part of) > >can offer, if (and only if) we can support them in a portable, > >backward-compatible and smoothly-declining (does this word make > >sense?) fashion. E.g., I'd like versioned symbols as well, but > >they seem to be impossible to realize while fulfilling the last > >mentioned property. > > "degrading gracefully" is the term I have always used. Thanks a lot. I sat here for minutes trying to think of this expression. Literally. And after I couldn't get any helpful clues from dict.leo.org, I reckoned I'd just send it anyway, people will understand. But yes, I do very much appreciate being corrected for language/spelling and stuff. How else should I get rid of my mistakes? > Open Source > is almost always an evolutionary process, so we can only take it one > step at a time... best of all, if we step out of line, it is usually > easy to get back on track and try again with something else :-) ACK. And it's all been words so far only, I won't think of implementation until afterwards (can you tell I'm not a physicist?). You know what: I think I did it. I got static linux-dietlibc working here, except for some minor details. Took long, found ugly bugs, hate the fact that I was not stubborn enough to apply the libltdl `clean parsing' patch back then. Will have to wait until tomorrow, though, booze is waiting. Cheers, Ralf _______________________________________________ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
