[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: and Makefile not generated when using a static library

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: and Makefile not generated when using a static library
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 07:26:51 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-10-28)

Hello William,

* William Pursell wrote on Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 04:34:48AM CEST:
> Stefano Lattarini wrote:
> > Strictly speaking, AC_PROG_INSTALL is redundant here, being already 
> > AC_REQUIRE'd by AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE (this should hold from Automake 1.4 
> > at least, I think).
> Yes, I thought the AC_PROG_INSTALL was unnecessary, but a quick
> perusal of the docs didn't show that immediately, so I left
> it in.

Yeah, you're right in that the docs don't really state that.
OTOH, unless you are using $(INSTALL) yourself in a,
you shouldn't have to think about having to define it either
(as a rough guide to what you need to do manually).

> >> LT_INIT
> > Also, I don't think this is required: he's just trying to build a 
> > static library, so libtool is an overkill.  AC_PROG_RANLIB should be 
> > enough.  (Note: I have pratically no real experience in using libtool 
> > and in building static libraries with automake, so correct me if I'm 
> > wrong!).
> Is there any reason to avoid LT_INIT and use AC_PROG_RANLIB
> instead?  I thought that AC_PROG_RANLIB was considered
> deprecated, so that LT_INIT would be preferred here.

AC_PROG_RANLIB is deprecated if you anyway also use LT_INIT.  If you
don't need the latter, you can avoid lots of configure overhead by not
using it.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]