portability of -Lrelative_directory_name
Hi, A while ago someone said that if in a build directory I have a (not yet installed) ../lib/libfoo.la, to link with this library I should *not* use libtool ... -L../lib -lfoo but rather mention the .la file explicitly: libtool ... -L../lib ../lib/libfoo.la or libtool ... ../lib/libfoo.la Now I see the same advice in the second-to-last paragraph of http://wiki.finkproject.org/index.php/Fink:Porting_Notes Is it true that references to non-yet-installed libool libraries should not be made with -l? If so, it would be worth to document this in the libtool documentation. I didn't find it there. Bruno ___ Bug-libtool mailing list Bug-libtool@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-libtool
Re: portability of -Lrelative_directory_name
Hi Bruno, Bruno Haible wrote: Hi, A while ago someone said that if in a build directory I have a (not yet installed) ../lib/libfoo.la, to link with this library I should *not* use libtool ... -L../lib -lfoo but rather mention the .la file explicitly: libtool ... -L../lib ../lib/libfoo.la Even this will probably end up with the build directory encoded in the .la file's dependency_libs, the -L../lib will be modified to -L/absolute/path/to/lib and that added to dependency_libs. or libtool ... ../lib/libfoo.la Now I see the same advice in the second-to-last paragraph of http://wiki.finkproject.org/index.php/Fink:Porting_Notes Is it true that references to non-yet-installed libool libraries should not be made with -l? If so, it would be worth to document this in the libtool documentation. I didn't find it there. I think this is a bug in libtool that it encodes the build directory into the .la files, however, you are correct, it is a doc bug too, I will look making a patch to the docs tonight. Thanks, Peter -- Peter O'Gorman http://pogma.com ___ Bug-libtool mailing list Bug-libtool@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-libtool
Re: portability of -Lrelative_directory_name
Bruno Haible wrote: Hi, A while ago someone said that if in a build directory I have a (not yet installed) ../lib/libfoo.la, to link with this library I should *not* use libtool ... -L../lib -lfoo but rather mention the .la file explicitly: libtool ... -L../lib ../lib/libfoo.la or libtool ... ../lib/libfoo.la Now I see the same advice in the second-to-last paragraph of http://wiki.finkproject.org/index.php/Fink:Porting_Notes Is it true that references to non-yet-installed libool libraries should not be made with -l? If so, it would be worth to document this in the libtool documentation. I didn't find it there. Bruno Automake document this in paragraph Program and Library Variables xxx_LIBADD and xxx_LDADD But if project don't use automake may be good libtool to detail too. Roumen ___ Bug-libtool mailing list Bug-libtool@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-libtool
Re: portability of -Lrelative_directory_name
Hello Bruno, * Bruno Haible wrote on Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 02:51:08PM CET: A while ago someone said that if in a build directory I have a (not yet installed) ../lib/libfoo.la, to link with this library I should *not* use libtool ... -L../lib -lfoo but rather mention the .la file explicitly: libtool ... -L../lib ../lib/libfoo.la or libtool ... ../lib/libfoo.la You should use the last one, none of the others. Is it true that references to non-yet-installed libool libraries should not be made with -l? If so, it would be worth to document this in the libtool documentation. I didn't find it there. Quoting info libtool Linking executables: (1) However, you should avoid using `-L' or `-l' flags to link against an uninstalled libtool library. Just specify the relative path to the `.la' file, such as `../intl/libintl.la'. This is a design decision to eliminate any ambiguity when linking against uninstalled shared libraries. This has been documented for eons. Cheers, Ralf ___ Bug-libtool mailing list Bug-libtool@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-libtool
