libtool ChangeLog

2005-09-27 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
CVSROOT:/cvsroot/libtool Module name:libtool Branch: Changes by: Ralf Wildenhues [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/09/27 06:48:20 Modified files: . : ChangeLog Log message: * tests/defs.m4sh, tests/testsuite.at (PREPARE_TESTS) AUTORECONF:

libtool ChangeLog Makefile.am

2005-09-27 Thread Gary V . Vaughan
CVSROOT:/cvsroot/libtool Module name:libtool Branch: Changes by: Gary V. Vaughan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/09/27 10:03:49 Modified files: . : ChangeLog Makefile.am Log message: * libltdl/ltdl.c (lt_dlcaller_register): Renamed to avoid

libtool ChangeLog NEWS

2005-09-27 Thread Gary V . Vaughan
CVSROOT:/cvsroot/libtool Module name:libtool Branch: Changes by: Gary V. Vaughan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/09/27 10:41:05 Modified files: . : ChangeLog NEWS Log message: * libltdl/ltdl.h (lt_dlmutex_register, lt_dlmutex_lock)

libtool ChangeLog libtoolize.m4sh

2005-09-27 Thread Gary V . Vaughan
CVSROOT:/cvsroot/libtool Module name:libtool Branch: Changes by: Gary V. Vaughan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/09/27 13:09:20 Modified files: . : ChangeLog libtoolize.m4sh Log message: * libtoolize.m4sh (func_scan_files): Support projects that

libtool ChangeLog libtool.m4 ltdl.m4 [branch-1-5]

2005-09-27 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
CVSROOT:/cvsroot/libtool Module name:libtool Branch: branch-1-5 Changes by: Ralf Wildenhues [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/09/27 16:25:43 Modified files: . : ChangeLog libtool.m4 ltdl.m4 Log message: * libtool.m4 (AC_DEPLIBS_CHECK_METHOD)

281-gary-fixup-ltdl-symbolnames.diff

2005-09-27 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
Okay to apply to HEAD? Symbol naming convention nit. libltdl/lt_error.c | 14 +++--- 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) Index: libtool--devo--1.0/ChangeLog from Gary V. Vaughan [EMAIL PROTECTED] * libltdl/lt_error.c (lt__last_error, lt__error_strings): The

Re: Version api [was 276-gary-remove-unusable-deprecated-ltdl-apis.diff]

2005-09-27 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Hi Gary, Hallo Ralf! Maybe we should add a couple of public #define's for ltdl API? Like this: #define LTDL_MAJOR 2 #define LTDL_MINOR 0 #define LTDL_REVISION 0 #define LTDL_RELEASE ((LTDL_MAJOR 16) | (LTDL_MINOR 8) | LTDL_REVISION) so packages that have

Re: 281-gary-fixup-ltdl-symbolnames.diff

2005-09-27 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hi Gary, * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 12:19:31PM CEST: Okay to apply to HEAD? Yes, please. Thank you! Symbol naming convention nit. I missed that bit! Oh no.. ;-) Cheers, Ralf libltdl/lt_error.c | 14 +++--- 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

Re: Version api [was 276-gary-remove-unusable-deprecated-ltdl-apis.diff]

2005-09-27 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hi Gary, * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 12:52:44PM CEST: Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Maybe we should add a couple of public #define's for ltdl API? Like this: #define LTDL_MAJOR 2 #define LTDL_MINOR 0 #define LTDL_REVISION 0 #define LTDL_RELEASE ((LTDL_MAJOR 16) |

FYI: fixup ltdl symbolnames [281]

2005-09-27 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Applied to HEAD. * looking for [EMAIL PROTECTED]/libtool--devo--1.0--patch-294 to compare with * comparing to [EMAIL PROTECTED]/libtool--devo--1.0--patch-294 M ChangeLog M libltdl/lt_error.c * modified files Index: Changelog

Re: 277-gary-rename-remaining-troublesome-ltdl-apis.diff

2005-09-27 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Hi Gary, Hallo Ralf, * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Sun, Sep 18, 2005 at 02:30:03AM CEST: This fixes the remaining holes that allowed libltdl clients to stumble across each others' loaded modules. Of course, there is nothing to prevent clients from registering a dumb

FYI: libtoolize without automake or AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR [278]

2005-09-27 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 94 hours without comment (on the repost addressing Ralfs feedback), so... Applied to HEAD. * looking for [EMAIL PROTECTED]/libtool--devo--1.0--patch-295 to compare with * comparing to [EMAIL PROTECTED]/libtool--devo--1.0--patch-295 M

Re: include_expsyms clobbers user files.

2005-09-27 Thread Peter Ekberg
Hi! (Using a real MUA for a change...) * Ralf Wildenhues wrote on Sunday, September 25, 2005 15:10 CEST: * Peter Ekberg wrote on Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 12:43:46PM CEST: * Ralf Wildenhues wrote on Thursday, September 22, 2005 10:06 CEST: * Peter Ekberg wrote on Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 10:00:32AM

279-gary-LT_CONFIG_LTDL_DIR.diff

2005-09-27 Thread Gary V. Vaughan
Hallo Ralf, Thanks for the review. This fixes the inline LT_CONFIG_LTDL_DIR problem you report, but I'm not sure I understand how the aclocal.m4 problem came to be: Ralf Wildenhues wrote: ++ cat aclocal.m4 ./foo/libltdl/configure.ac How did configure_ac get set to ./foo/libltdl/configure.ac?

Re: 281-gary-fixup-ltdl-symbolnames.diff

2005-09-27 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: Okay to apply to HEAD? This patch looks good. It does not appear to have a de-stabilizing effect. Bob Symbol naming convention nit. libltdl/lt_error.c | 14 +++--- 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) Index:

Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD

2005-09-27 Thread Jacob Meuser
On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 04:15:11PM +, Olly Betts wrote: On 2005-09-23, Ralf Wildenhues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [ By the way, I don't think everyone in this discussion has subscribed this list; if in doubt, speak up, or even better, set Mail-Followup-To: next time ] I'm following it

Re: static vs. dynamic linking

2005-09-27 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hi Enrico, * Enrico Weigelt wrote on Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 09:56:27PM CEST: how does libtool decide whether to link against an .la library dynamically vs. statically ? For a program or a library? Uninstalled or installed library (see recent bug report of Howard Chu)? On a system with both

SYSROOT/DESTDIR (was Re: static vs. dynamic linking)

2005-09-27 Thread Howard Chu
Ralf Wildenhues wrote: We have better support for sysroot and/or DESTDIR on our TODO list. Why don't you help us improve and fix libtool? That is bound to be a lot less work. *time passes* http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool-patches/2005-06/msg00161.html Oh, you asked before. Why not

Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD

2005-09-27 Thread Peter O'Gorman
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jacob Meuser wrote: | I think perhaps you should ask [EMAIL PROTECTED] about this. he might | be able to explain why -lstdc++ is not implicitly used in `g++ -shared', | which could give you a good starting point on how to fix the | problem. | I

sh portability questions

2005-09-27 Thread Akim Demaille
Now that there are no doubts about the portability of shell functions (in the sense that there's always a shell on the machine that supports function ---and maybe the documentation should reflect this), I'm curious about the support of return and local. Is there anything known about them? ISTR

Re: static vs. dynamic linking

2005-09-27 Thread Enrico Weigelt
* Ralf Wildenhues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, how does libtool decide whether to link against an .la library dynamically vs. statically ? For a program or a library? Uninstalled or installed library (see recent bug report of Howard Chu)? Each of these cases ... I've now figured

Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD

2005-09-27 Thread Olly Betts
[Cc:-ed to Mark Espie at Jacob's suggestion: I think perhaps you should ask [EMAIL PROTECTED] about this. he might be able to explain why -lstdc++ is not implicitly used in `g++ -shared' If you need context, this is the whole thread: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.libtool.general/6671

Re: postdeps empty on OpenBSD

2005-09-27 Thread Olly Betts
On 2005-09-22, Peter O'Gorman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do we know what the versions of the OS/gcc are where -lstdc++ is missing? We can enplicitly add it (as we did recently for, I think, sunpro c++). Is this a gcc bug, or is it by design? I've only been able to test OpenBSD 3.7 with g++

Re: static vs. dynamic linking

2005-09-27 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hi Enrico, * Enrico Weigelt wrote on Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 03:27:21PM CEST: * Ralf Wildenhues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: how does libtool decide whether to link against an .la library dynamically vs. statically ? For a program or a library? Uninstalled or installed library Each of

Re: SYSROOT/DESTDIR

2005-09-27 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hi Tim, * Tim Rice wrote on Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 07:56:31PM CEST: On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Howard Chu wrote: First of all, my objective - other folks may have their own objectives different than this: Build a suite of software that uses shared libraries, such that any embedded runpaths only

Re: sh portability questions

2005-09-27 Thread Paul Eggert
Akim Demaille [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Now that there are no doubts about the portability of shell functions (in the sense that there's always a shell on the machine that supports function ---and maybe the documentation should reflect this), Yes, it should. I'm curious about the support of

Re: SYSROOT/DESTDIR

2005-09-27 Thread Tim Rice
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Hi Tim, * Tim Rice wrote on Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 07:56:31PM CEST: I'd like to be able have the embedded runpath be /opt/lib even if I install in /opt/foo/lib. (the package posinstall script would put symbolic links in /opt/lib) I believe