Re: question about AC_LTDL_SYS_DLOPEN_DEPLIBS

[Robert Boehne]

Albert:

>From earlier discussions, it was noted that
libltdl_cv_sys_dlopen_deplibs=yes
actually not only referrs to dlopen() calls, but their equivalents
on other OS's like HPUX.  Why don't we do this: set
ibltdl_cv_sys_dlopen_deplibs
based on host in configury, then add a test case that uses libltdl to
check if libltdl_cv_sys_dlopen_deplibs is set properly?
That way those platforms that aren't set properly will fail the test
case, and we will be notified we need to change ltdl.m4 to fix it.
  This doesn't handle the cases such as Tru64 5.1 patched vs not patched
but it gets us most of the way there.  N'cest pas?

Robert

address@hidden wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 11:36:11AM -0500, Robert Boehne wrote:
> > address@hidden wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 10:10:49AM -0500, Robert Boehne wrote:
> > > > "Gary V. Vaughan" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Monday 16 July 2001  4:10 pm, Robert Boehne wrote:
> > > > > >   Here is the test case, if someone wants to libtoolize it, we
> > > > > > could add it to the macro.
> > > > >
> > > > > Seconded!  I would happily accept a patch to perform the test 
> > > > > *instead* of
> > > > > listing values for only hosts triplets that have been researched...
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > >         Gary.
> > > >
> > > > If we use the test *instead* of looking at the host we would miss the
> > > > case for Tru64 4-5.1, which passes the test but doesn't search the
> > > > library RPATH, but perhaps we could limit it to that case only.
> > >
> > > Then how about augmenting the patch to catch this case? This is
> > > actually important for people how have Tru64 UNIX with patch kit < #2
> > > where such an augmented test would fail and patch kit >= #2 where the
> > > augmented test should succeed.
> > >
> > > --
> > > albert chin (address@hidden)
> >
> > That's a great idea, if we don't want to set dlopen_deplibs to "yes"
> > in that case anyway that is what we should test for.
> > I'm having some trouble creating this test case though, how can
> > I use ltdl in a program that is used to create libtool?
> 
> Just so I'm on the same page, this is to autodetect
> $libltdl_cv_sys_dlopen_deplibs correct? If so, why do you want to use
> ltdl at all? Isn't it enough to write the following test programs
> during the run of ltdl.m4:
>   ('t1') dlopen test program 't2'
>   ('t2') dlopen'ed by 't1' and depends on library 't3'
>   ('t3') library depending on 't4'
>   ('t4') dummy library
> and then run t1. If you fail, libltdl_cv_sys_dlopen_deplibs=unknown.
> If you succeed, libltdl_cv_sys_dlopen_deplibs=yes.
> 
> The purpose of 't2' is to detect if dlopen loads dependency libraries
> and the purpose of 't3' is to detect if dlopen honours RPATH in a
> library.
> 
> BTW, this probably isn't so trivial because you'd need to embed the
> runtime path into programs 't2' and 't3'. You definitely don't want to
> set LD_LIBRARY_PATH. Can you use the generated libtool program during
> ltdl.m4?
> 
> --
> albert chin (address@hidden)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Libtool mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool

-- 
Robert Boehne             Software Engineer
Ricardo Software   Chicago Technical Center
TEL: (630)789-0003 x. 238
FAX: (630)789-0127
email:  address@hidden