Re: Two small libltdl patches.
Peter O'Gorman wrote: On systems without argz we were exporting unmangled symbols argz_count and argz_add from libltdl. Not really a good idea. Rather than mangle the names, since we do not use either function, they were removed. But wasn't there a thread back in June where we explicitly added a bunch of argz functions, so that (a) we would be using the same file as gnulib, and (b) that file would have a complete argz implementation? Doesn't your patch fork our copy again? (Or have I missed some intervening decisions/development)? -- Chuck
Re: Two small libltdl patches.
On Sun, 24 Aug 2008, Charles Wilson wrote: But wasn't there a thread back in June where we explicitly added a bunch of argz functions, so that (a) we would be using the same file as gnulib, and (b) that file would have a complete argz implementation? I recall that it was decided that it was not necessary for the implementation to be identical to gnulib and that the code should not need to be updated unless it is found to be broken. Bob == Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer,http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
Re: Two small libltdl patches.
Peter O'Gorman wrote: So, with the functions also removed from the header, ok? Fine by me -- but I can't give official approval. g -- Chuck
