Re: [Fink-devel] Re: libtool "module" behavior and darwin

2002-11-25 Thread Benjamin Reed
That's great news. I cannot, however, promise to have these available anytime soon. I would appreciate help. Anyone? I can certainly help out with this. While waiting for more input on this thread, I actually ended up coming up with the same solution last night. I woke up this morning to find

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: libtool "module" behavior and darwin

2002-11-25 Thread Nick Hudson
On Monday 25 November 2002 10:47 am, David wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: RIPEMD160 > > > > Feel free to take the patches from NetBSD pkgsrc and makes noises with > > the KDE people. http://www.netbsd.org/Documentation/software/packages.html > > > No need to make noise with

[Fink-devel] Re: libtool "module" behavior and darwin

2002-11-25 Thread Guido Draheim
Ooops, so I did not read the patch too closely - thanks for the clarification. IOW, there are now two dummy binaries, one is the system executable, the other is the dlopen-able module, and both depend on a single system lib*.la - cute! just to check back with the darwin'ers: a dlopen().so can link

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: libtool "module" behavior and darwin

2002-11-25 Thread David
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 >Feel free to take the patches from NetBSD pkgsrc and makes noises with the KDE people. http://www.netbsd.org/Documentation/software/packages.html No need to make noise with the KDE people, I am reading this list *grins* If you have a patch a

[Fink-devel] Re: libtool "module" behavior and darwin

2002-11-25 Thread Nick Hudson
On Monday 25 November 2002 10:04 am, Guido Draheim wrote: > It's the correct solution AFAICS - from the same sources two > libtool libraries are built - one is a system library that > gets linked to the system binary. And the module libtool > archive is separate from that. Both .la will be able to

[Fink-devel] Re: libtool "module" behavior and darwin

2002-11-25 Thread Guido Draheim
It's the correct solution AFAICS - from the same sources two libtool libraries are built - one is a system library that gets linked to the system binary. And the module libtool archive is separate from that. Both .la will be able to pick up the same .lo being compiled along, so it is nothing more t

[Fink-devel] Re: libtool "module" behavior and darwin

2002-11-25 Thread Nick Hudson
On Sunday 24 November 2002 6:23 pm, Benjamin Reed wrote: > One of the problems we're running into getting KDE working on Darwin is > libtool's concept of a "module", and how it's mapped onto Darwin's > linker behavior. This was talked about some time ago by Michael Matz and myself. > To get aro

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: libtool "module" behavior and darwin

2002-11-24 Thread Guido Draheim
Benjamin Reed wrote: On Sunday, November 24, 2002, at 05:44 PM, Guido Draheim wrote: You mean they are listed as ".la" on the link-line? To stick with the example, there is a LIB_KDEGAMES = libkdegames.la in your makefiles? aargh, kde maniacs at work No, it would be, libfoo_la_LIBADD

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: libtool "module" behavior and darwin

2002-11-24 Thread Benjamin Reed
On Sunday, November 24, 2002, at 05:44 PM, Guido Draheim wrote: You mean they are listed as ".la" on the link-line? To stick with the example, there is a LIB_KDEGAMES = libkdegames.la in your makefiles? aargh, kde maniacs at work No, it would be, libfoo_la_LIBADD = $(top_builddir)/kdec

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: libtool "module" behavior and darwin

2002-11-24 Thread Guido Draheim
Benjamin Reed wrote: On Sunday, November 24, 2002, at 05:17 PM, Guido Draheim wrote: That's actually the difference between "-all-static" and "-static" IIRC. The "-static" should only link its .la's as static, and non-la's dynamic. But perhaps I am mistaken too, that's why I did ask if you did

Re: [Fink-devel] Re: libtool "module" behavior and darwin

2002-11-24 Thread Benjamin Reed
On Sunday, November 24, 2002, at 05:17 PM, Guido Draheim wrote: That's actually the difference between "-all-static" and "-static" IIRC. The "-static" should only link its .la's as static, and non-la's dynamic. But perhaps I am mistaken too, that's why I did ask if you did try somewhen. Well,

[Fink-devel] Re: libtool "module" behavior and darwin

2002-11-24 Thread Guido Draheim
Benjamin Reed wrote: On Sunday, November 24, 2002, at 04:54 PM, Guido Draheim wrote: The only hint that I can give has the form of a question: Did you try kbackgammon_LDADD = -static kbackgammon.la $(LIB_KDEGAMES) $(LIB_KSYCOCA) kbackgammon_SOURCES = dummy.cpp $ ./libtool --help --mode=lin

[Fink-devel] Re: libtool "module" behavior and darwin

2002-11-24 Thread Benjamin Reed
On Sunday, November 24, 2002, at 04:54 PM, Guido Draheim wrote: The only hint that I can give has the form of a question: Did you try kbackgammon_LDADD = -static kbackgammon.la $(LIB_KDEGAMES) $(LIB_KSYCOCA) kbackgammon_SOURCES = dummy.cpp $ ./libtool --help --mode=link | grep static -all-s

[Fink-devel] Re: libtool "module" behavior and darwin

2002-11-24 Thread Guido Draheim
Benjamin Reed wrote: [...] ---(snip!)--- kbackgammon_la_LDFLAGS = $(all_libraries) $(KDE_RPATH) -module -avoid-version kbackgammon_LDADD = kbackgammon.la $(LIB_KDEGAMES) $(LIB_KSYCOCA) kbackgammon_SOURCES = dummy.cpp ---(snip!)--- ...this is a no-no, kbackgammon is trying to link against a bund