In regard to: Re: LT_* equivalent to AC_CHECK_LIB?, Ralf Wildenhues said...:
Has any work (perhaps as part of libtool 2.0) gone into addressing
the reason(s) why they were doing that?
Hmm. There has been quite some discussion on this and the -patches
list. Please use the mail archives to dig it up.
Will do.
I've suggested an
extensive set of testsuite tests (in some Debian bug report) which I
would see as a prerequisite to rewriting the deplib search algorithm
in ltmain. One point is that, for consistency, the algorithm would
need to recursively include all indirect dependencies.
If anyone really cares, I can dig up a list of URLs to some important
discussion pieces. I also have some half-finished notes, unpublished.
What is definitely lacking on my side is something like some months
with lots of time...
Thanks Ralf. I subscribe to this list but not -patches so I'm much less
aware of what goes on there. If I feel the need to dig any deeper on this
(pretty doubtful at this point, you and Bob have completely disabused me
of the notion that this is something I want to try help "solve"), I'll
do the necessary digging in the archives.
Tim
--
Tim Mooney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Information Technology Services (701) 231-1076 (Voice)
Room 242-J6, IACC Building (701) 231-8541 (Fax)
North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105-5164
_______________________________________________
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
