On 04/13/2012 02:25 AM, Simon Wilkinson wrote:
On 13 Apr 2012, at 00:47, Jason Edgecombe wrote:
is there a reason why we shouldn't use libtool? licensing perhaps?
Some people have a hatred of libtool. However, I haven't let that stop me ...
As discussed here in the past, I've been working on changing the way in which
we do shared libraries. This work gives us a library per build directory,
changes all of our binaries so that they use shared rather than static
libraries, and uses map files to enforce public APIs from each module in the
code base.
There are still a number of issues with this, which is why I haven't pushed it
to OpenAFS. The principal one is that 'make dest' needs to build all static
build products, which radically changes the way that it is implemented (you
need to tell configure that you want a 'dest style' tree). Also, whilst libtool
builds every object twice (for PIC and non-PIC), we need to add in a LWP build
to this, at least until we can remove LWP from the tree.
I'm happy to share the current state of the code with anyone who's interested.
Getting this finished isn't a development priority for me, so if someone else
fancied completing the work, that would be very handy.
Cheers,
Simon
ok. Now that that the libwrap script has been merged (
http://gerrit.openafs.org/7202 ), what remains to be done before adding
"make check" to one of the buildbot builders?
Jason
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-devel mailing list
OpenAFS-devel@openafs.org
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
