[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: portability of -L<relative_directory_name>

From: Peter O'Gorman
Subject: Re: portability of -L<relative_directory_name>
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 08:55:52 -0600
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20071115)

Hi Bruno,

Bruno Haible wrote:
> Hi,
> A while ago someone said that if in a build directory I have a (not yet
> installed) ../lib/libfoo.la, to link with this library I should *not* use
>    libtool ... -L../lib -lfoo
> but rather mention the .la file explicitly:
>    libtool ... -L../lib ../lib/libfoo.la

Even this will probably end up with the build directory encoded in the
.la file's dependency_libs, the -L../lib will be modified to
-L/absolute/path/to/lib and that added to dependency_libs.

> or
>    libtool ... ../lib/libfoo.la
> Now I see the same advice in the second-to-last paragraph of
>   http://wiki.finkproject.org/index.php/Fink:Porting_Notes
> Is it true that references to non-yet-installed libool libraries should not be
> made with -l? If so, it would be worth to document this in the libtool
> documentation. I didn't find it there.

I think this is a bug in libtool that it encodes the build directory
into the .la files, however, you are correct, it is a doc bug too, I
will look making a patch to the docs tonight.

Peter O'Gorman

reply via email to

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