Re: config.guess and freedom

[Bob Friesenhahn]

On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Gary V.Vaughan wrote:
>
> > Another problematic case is ensuring "correctness" of guess-derived
> > results. Without additional checks, you can't guarantee anything.
> > Eg. wrt. host_os, you can't guess on the object format or if an OS
> > honors LD_LIBRARY_PATH/LD_RUN_PATH or other advanced linker features
> > libtool might require on a system (I am not a libtool expert, so bare
> > with the examples).
>
> Libtool has however done exactly this with reasonable success for the
> last 8 years... There are cases where testing $host is simply the path
> of least resistance, but pragmatism is not a bad thing.

Yes, libtool works, but by definition it is always behind.  There are
always new operating systems, and tools are always changing.  That is
why software I support has been using CVS versions of libtool since
the very beginning.  As a basis for comparison, there is a large
population of developers still using a version of Autoconf which dates
from 1996.  Apparently feature testing does work for many/most areas.

As far as shared library naming and linker features goes, I expect
that tests could be written which observe what works and what doesn't.
Maybe in an hour or so, a feature-based libtool would come up with the
right answers.  Most people don't have that long to wait.

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
address@hidden
http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen