[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Check for ar (libtool bug)
From: |
Boehne, Robert |
Subject: |
RE: Check for ar (libtool bug) |
Date: |
Mon, 24 Feb 2003 10:04:36 -0600 |
Ok, I'll buy that, but it just reminds me that I need to
go through and refactor libtool to make these things consistent. ;0
Approved and checking in to CVS head.
Robert
-----Original Message-----
From: Schleicher Ralph (LLI) [mailto:address@hidden
Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 8:29 AM
To: Robert Boehne
Cc: address@hidden; address@hidden
Subject: Re: Check for ar (libtool bug)
Robert Boehne wrote:
> Typically we define things to ":" when they are not found.
Hi Robert,
$ grep AC_CHECK_TOOL libtool.m4
AC_CHECK_TOOL(RANLIB, ranlib, :)
AC_CHECK_TOOL(STRIP, strip, :)
AC_CHECK_TOOL(DLLTOOL, dlltool, false)
AC_CHECK_TOOL(AS, as, false)
AC_CHECK_TOOL(OBJDUMP, objdump, false)
[AC_CHECK_TOOL(GCJ, gcj, no)
[AC_CHECK_TOOL(RC, windres, no)
That makes two times ":" (true) and 5 times "false"
or "no".
> If we change your patch to AC_CHECK_TOOL(AR, ar, :), does
> it still work to fix the problem you ran into?
It still works if "ar" is found but using ":" as the default
command for creating an old archive is IMHO the wrong thing.
Using ":" for "ranlib" and "strip" is acceptable because
libtool works well without them but AR=: returns the wrong
exit status if you attempt to create an old archive.
Therefore AR=false is correct.
--
Ralph
_______________________________________________
Libtool-patches mailing list
address@hidden
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool-patches