[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: ltdl/mdemo test

From: Nick Hudson
Subject: Re: ltdl/mdemo test
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 09:19:04 +0100

On Thursday 13 September 2001 21:30, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 07:31:41PM +0100, Nick Hudson wrote:
> > On Tuesday 11 September 2001 19:34, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> > >   * ltdl.m4 [AC_LTDL_SYS_DLOPEN_DEPLIBS]: Teach ltdl about the
> > >   behavior of OpenBSD's dlopen().
> >

> Okay.  Sorry.  I thought that they would have had the same dlopen
> issues.

You right all the BSD derivatives are likely to have the same dlopen issues.

If you remember you introduced this stuff after I pointed out that the dlopen 
behaviour on NetBSD didn't need libltdl to worry about dependencies. I'm 
surprised it took the OpenBSD guys so long to catch up. 

> HAVE_LIBDL is a misnomer, and should perhaps be renamed to
> HAVE_DLOPEN, since the additon of a library that contains dlopen is
> handled separately.
> Does libtool's configury detect that there is a dlopen function on
> NetBSD, but forget to set HAVE_LIBDL?  I just backported AC_LTDL_DLLIB
> to branch-1-4, so cvs updating may be fruitful...

It looks as though you fixed this with Assar Westerlund's fix...

Changes by:      Gary V. Vaughan <address@hidden>         01/09/13 15:47:02

Modified files:
         .              : ChangeLog ltdl.m4 

Log message:
         * ltdl.m4 (AC_LTDL_DLLIB): call dlopen with arguments so the test
         does not fail due to a prototype in dlfcn.h


> Thanks for persevering with me :-)

Its OK. Thanks for listening. :)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]