[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch
From: |
Gary V. Vaughan |
Subject: |
Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch |
Date: |
Mon, 02 Feb 2004 10:55:20 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20030925 Thunderbird/0.3 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Albert Chin wrote:
| On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 06:25:57PM +0000, Scott James Remnant wrote:
| > LT_INIT_LIBTOOL([1.6 C++ disabled-shared])
|
| I'd rather:
| LT_PREREQ(<minimum version>)
| LT_INIT_LIBTOOL(<options>, <tags>)
I like separating the tags out for sure.
Splitting out the PREREQ is certainly cleaner from an implementation point of
view, and is orthogonal to the Autoconf interface. But AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE takes
a minimum version number in its <options> parameter.
Following the principle of least surprise, I think I'd like to advocate the
Autoconf style in the manual, but accept the Automake style. Maybe with an
AU_DEFUN that splits the arguments out (is that even possible? I haven't
played with autoupdate too much, so I don't know how powerful it is...)?
Cheers,
Gary.
- --
Gary V. Vaughan ())_. address@hidden,gnu.org}
Research Scientist ( '/ http://www.oranda.demon.co.uk
GNU Hacker / )= http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool
Technical Author `(_~)_ http://sources.redhat.com/autobook
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFAHiyXFRMICSmD1gYRAhNPAJ92Or/zoqQp6P+AHtR/Mc6Oyi1qrACgw9fw
Df9sKgjUNtuG8w8yxYy22Ww=
=xVCB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Gary V. Vaughan, 2004/02/02
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Gary V. Vaughan, 2004/02/02
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Scott James Remnant, 2004/02/02
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Gary V. Vaughan, 2004/02/02
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Tom Tromey, 2004/02/02
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Gary V. Vaughan, 2004/02/03
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Scott James Remnant, 2004/02/03
- Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Gary V. Vaughan, 2004/02/03
Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch,
Gary V. Vaughan <=
Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Gary V. Vaughan, 2004/02/02
Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Gary V. Vaughan, 2004/02/02
Re: RFC: 77-gary-diagnose-version-mismatch.patch, Scott James Remnant, 2004/02/03