[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: FYI: test old m4 interface [280]
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: FYI: test old m4 interface [280] |
Date: |
Sun, 2 Oct 2005 10:54:07 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.9i |
Hi Gary,
* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 06:28:57PM CEST:
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >
> >And another one. :-/
>
> Excellent... the wall between here and 2.0 is slowly getting thinner...
I dearly hope so. :)
> >The first failure is fixed by the first hunk in the patch below:
> >the sub-configure is invoked by the toplevel configure
> >(the AC_CONFIG_SUBDIRS _is_ working iff the libltdl package is in the
> >directory named `libltdl').
> >
> >The extra configure caused(!) autotools reruns which then changed(!)
> >the symlinked-to files!
>
> Ahah! Thankyou... I saw that go by in one of my pre-submission tests,
> and then couldn't figure out how to make it happen again.
>
> >Maybe we should disallow `libtoolize --ltdl' without `--install'?
>
> That's effectively the same as having --ltdl always do an implicit
> --install. Not necessarily a bad idea. We could do that for the
> alpha release, and see if it causes any problems during testing...
Erm, I meant --copy, not --install. Sorry.
> >OK, with that in place, it gets through configuration and builds the
> >libltdl object files, then fails with
> >| pmake
> >| cd libltdl && pmake libltdlc.la
> >| ...
> >| make: don't know how to make ./dlopen.la. Stop
> >| *** Error code 2
> >
> >Why? The usual non-GNU make foo vs ./foo problem:
> >| LT_DLLOADERS = ./dlopen.la
> >| dlopen.la: $(dlopen_la_OBJECTS) $(dlopen_la_DEPENDENCIES)
> >| libltdl_la_DEPENDENCIES = $(LT_DLLOADERS) $(LTLIBOBJS)
>
> Okay, I think I can fix that quite easily. Patch to follow.
Cool.
> >But _then_, I don't like the need to call aclocal at all. I tried to
> >eliminate it, the second ugly hunk below is what I could come up with.
>
> Cool! I like that alot :-)
>
> >Seems we have introduced a silent dependency on aclocal >= 1.2. :-)
>
> Which you just removed? Or elsewhere?
No, not elsewhere. But I meant something different:
If I apply my proposed patch, our test will be fine, but users will
still have to use `aclocal'. Shouldn't we provide an AM_CONDITIONAL
replacement for them in that case? Is it possible at all to provide
this only in the case where the user does not use aclocal -- is there
some trick to do this?
> >Do you think it is ok to rip off Automake code like this in the test?
>
> Sure. It's all GPL. I would add a comment to say where it came from
> though, if only incase we want to resynch it in a few years...
OK.
For now, I have applied the first hunk only, since the rest requires
more discussion.
Cheers,
Ralf
* tests/old-m4-iface.at (Makefile.in): Do not reconfigure
libltdl directory.
Index: tests/old-m4-iface.at
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/libtool/libtool/tests/old-m4-iface.at,v
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.2 old-m4-iface.at
--- tests/old-m4-iface.at 30 Sep 2005 10:09:58 -0000 1.2
+++ tests/old-m4-iface.at 2 Oct 2005 08:52:37 -0000
@@ -113,7 +113,7 @@
all: $(TARGETS)
libltdl/libltdlc.la:
- cd libltdl && ./configure && $(MAKE)
+ cd libltdl && $(MAKE)
module.la: module.lo
$(LTLINK) module.lo -module -avoid-version -rpath /dev/null
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: FYI: test old m4 interface [280],
Ralf Wildenhues <=