Re: Use partial relative path in LIBADD

[Daniel Neuberger]

On 04/20/2011 07:21 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Why do you ever need to use the former?  (It can come in handy in
> included Makefile.am fragments.)  The important bits are: however
> you specify a file in one Makefile.am, you should always do it the
> same way, or things may go wrong.  So a library built from the same
> Makefile.am should have a relative name; but arguably, you could
> also write, e.g.,
>
> lib_LTLIBRARIES = ./libfoo.la
> __libfoo_la_SOURCES = ...
>
> if you really want to make your life hard; I'd always suggest
>
> lib_LTLIBRARIES = libfoo.la
> libfoo_la_SOURCES = ...
>
> and using plain 'libfoo.la' in libbar_la_LIBADD.

Thanks Ralf.

I'm trying to link to a library built using a different Makefile.am in a 
different location in the source tree.  I haven't been able to get the 
plain "libfoo.la" to work for that.  Is there a way to do so?

The only way I've found that works is to give the complete relative path 
using $(top_builddir).

Sorry if I'm misunderstanding something; I really appreciate the help.

- Daniel