[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupd
From: |
Nick Hudson |
Subject: |
Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates] |
Date: |
Mon, 02 Apr 2001 12:26:37 +0100 |
Michael Matz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, 1 Apr 2001, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I have applied the following to HEAD (and similar to MLB).
> > >
> > > Why also MLB? Was it really broken there too? I ask, because I
> > > _definitely_ got multiple libraries in link commands.
> >
> > Try out the new depdemo-dups.test on an old libtool script, and you'll see
> > what I mean. Perhaps I have found and fixed a similar but different bug?
>
> I see. Argh, This then again means, that libtool will probably generate
> excessively large link commands for KDE. We sometimes list also dependent
> libs in the makefiles (history and lazyness), and this then cumulates over
> many libraries. Hmm, OK I need to check, if this really is so, but I
> suspect it.
I can confirm this. Some .la files created by NetBSD KDE 2 pkgs have
dependency_libs entries that are bigger than 2048 characters long. ATM,
the buffer in ltdl.c is currently set to 1024.
-lm and -lXmu appear far more than they need to...
Nick
--
aka address@hidden, address@hidden
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates], Michael Matz, 2001/04/01
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates], Gary V . Vaughan, 2001/04/01
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates], Michael Matz, 2001/04/01
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates], Gary V . Vaughan, 2001/04/01
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates], Michael Matz, 2001/04/01
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates], Gary V . Vaughan, 2001/04/01
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates], Alexandre Oliva, 2001/04/01
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates], Gary V . Vaughan, 2001/04/01
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates], Alexandre Oliva, 2001/04/01
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwin updates], Gary V . Vaughan, 2001/04/01
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates],
Nick Hudson <=
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates], Robert Boehne, 2001/04/03
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates], Gary V . Vaughan, 2001/04/03
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates], Michael Matz, 2001/04/03
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates], Alexandre Oliva, 2001/04/04
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates], Gary V . Vaughan, 2001/04/05
- 2001-04-03-gvv-ltdl-linebuffer.patch [Was Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates]], Gary V . Vaughan, 2001/04/03
- Re: 2001-04-03-gvv-ltdl-linebuffer.patch [Was Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates]], Alexandre Oliva, 2001/04/04