Drazen Kacar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Provided that there are some maintainers left.
There is according to the swift reply I got to my libtool mailing list post
the other day.
> I think I deleted the part where you said it would be more productive
> to do something about the whole thing instead of telling developers not
> to use libtool. (Or something to that effect, sorry if it's not a good
> enough quote). You're right, of course. But I'm not telling the developers
> that they should not use libtool. I'm only telling them that they
> shouldn't promote libtool as an infrastructure which solves linking
> problems, because it doesn't.
Sure it does. It just doesn't solve _all_ of them.
> That inevitably leads to pointing out some of libtool's failures, from
> which one might draw the conclusion that I'm advocating banishing libtool,
> but I don't think I wrote that. I think it should rest in peace.
I fail to see the distinction between "banishing" something and letting it
"rest in peace".
> But keep in mind that it's not a catch-all solution and don't
> promote it as such.
I don't believe anyone's been doing that. You seem to be knee-jerking in
response to other libtool debates you've had in the past (a long history of
them, it would appear).
> As far as wget is concerned, it wouldn't be a big problem to handle
> whatever the final decision brings. I would personally prefer a configure
> script which just checks for the library and header locations. It could
> use run-path flag as a default, provided that there is a way to stop it
> from doing that (since there's no way it can tell wheteher I want
> -R/usr/local/lib or -R$ORIGIN/../lib, for example).
As I've said, you can override anything you want at make-time. Since most
people won't want or need to disable libtool, this seems acceptable. Feel
free to send in a configure --without-libtool patch once the code has
stabilized, however, if you feel very strongly that the overriding behavior
needs to be at the configure-level rather than at the make-level. (It's
true that it's more convenient that way, since you can just type `make'
rather than having to include all your overriding variables each time you
re-make.)
> If it doesn't work on some platform, people will send patches. Another
> reason not to use complicated build tools unless really necessary is that
> you limit the user base which can send patches.
Huh?
---------------------------------------------------------------
Dan Harkless | To help prevent SPAM contamination,
GNU Wget co-maintainer | please do not mention this email
http://sunsite.dk/wget/ | address in Usenet posts -- thank you.
