On 11 Jun 2010, at 10:15, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
On 06/10/2010 03:07 PM, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
On 06/10/2010 11:10 AM, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
Hi,
I got an off-list report from a user about test failures in
2.2.6b, that turned out to be either because he'd configured
with --disable-shared or libtool had incorrectly guessed that
his system did not support shared libraries. (lots of lag in
the exchange).
Logs from clean tree of the unexpected failures.
AT_CHECK([$bindirneeded&& { test -f $libdir/../bin/???foo-0.dll ||
ls $libdir/../bin/*foo*0* 2>/dev/null ; } || ls $libdir/*foo*0*
2>/dev/null], [], [ignore], [ignore])
I am not sure what to do with this, without shared libraries we
will have a .lib or .a, which should both go in $libdir, right??
Should we just skip the whole test if $build_libtool_libs is no?
I won't pretend to understand half the corner cases with interactions
between PATH and library searching on Windows, but it seems to me
that this test is designed to check that something to do with dll
installation in $bindir is working. So, AFAICT the test makes no
sense with --disable-shared -- skipping the test looks like the right
thing to me.