On 3/28/08, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There was an earlier, much more elaborate one, by Keith Packard, > <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.libtool.general/6213>.
I believed I am not the first one... :) Did not find this specific thread though. But... For each report you usually have many people that solves this in a different (long, unmaintained and even incorrect) way, or fail to. > And we never applied anything there *because* there was no > patch that was nicely portable, or even degrade gracefully on > lesser capable platforms, IIRC. Can you please explain (As I don't understand) how allowing to override soname when generating a module makes it less portable? I truly don't understand... If user specify soname and system does not support soname, it is ignored. If system do support soname, then developer has reason to override this. If a user does not specify soname you keep current behavior. > Well, I haven't looked much at your 30 lines of Makefile.am, but I can > tell you maintaining those 30 lines is going to be *far less* hassle > than getting -soname support right. I am truly sorry... But I fail to understand this statement as-is. > FWIW2, if you believe modules are named *.so on all kinds of interesting > systems, nope. Sorry... I can detect this part at configure. I thought about creating another thread after this one... As libtool *KNOWS* the extension to use, it can place this on autoconf variable... Or add the following: libtool --mode=getvar shrext libtool --mode=getvar libext Thank you, Alon. _______________________________________________ http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
