On Mon, May 13, 2002 at 09:04:36AM +0300, Marko Karppinen wrote:
> I have been quite happy to have finally got rid of libtool on our links,
> however! I'd much prefer committing the rest of your patch and waiting for
> the first bug report about libtool-specific dependencies.
>
> The problem is that while linking with libtool might work with the
> Apple-supplied glibtool, it doesn't with a fresh GNU 1.4.x one. This means
> that running buildconf (with your other patch) would become mandatory on
> Darwin, even for end users. Me not like.
>
> Again, I throw the ball in your court -- it seems entirely possible to me to
> get the *real* dependencies figured out when building ap{ru}-config.
httpd-2.0 doesn't build with the stock libtool-1.4.2 either. So,
if you're using Apache 2.0, you're going to need a patched libtool
anyway. I'd imagine that binary distributions of httpd-2.0 will
include the patched libtool in its installbuilddir (whomever built
the binary needs a good libtool), so that may be a way to work
around the problem - leverage httpd's libtool on Darwin.
It's a point of contention that we've been trying to bring to Apple's
attention (Fred and I have been emailing the Core OS team). We're
trying to get them to a) include it in Jaguar and b) submit it
upstream. I'm crossing my fingers, but I'm not really optimistic on
this point that Apple is going to address this. I believe JimJag is
tasked with trying to submit ASF-desired patches to GNU tools
upstream to FSF.
After talking with the Apple linker developer, I'm not entirely clear
what we can do. Both of us agreed that it will get awfully messy
if we try to resolve the dependencies of httpd ourselves - the only
way to do this seems to be to leverage ap{ru}-config. As I mentioned
earlier, we discussed ways the linker could handle it, but that's
not going to help until possibly 10.3-land (and only if we keep
pressure on them to help).
Thoughts? -- justin
--
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
