[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 2.0.0.9 (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.
Thanks,
Peter
--
Peter O'Gorman
http://pogma.com