[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Using HEAD, still CXX is not used to link C++ libs

From: Brett H. Williams
Subject: Re: Using HEAD, still CXX is not used to link C++ libs
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:14:41 -0600
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i

On Aug 27, Boehne, Robert wrote:
> When the tag is CXX, CC = `your favorite C++ compiler, aka $CXX`
> Make sure your project actually has the latest libtool in it,
> and instead of hacking the generated libtool, submit a pach
> to libtool.m4 that supports your compiler.  It is easier in the
> long run.
> HTH,
> Robert


Sorry, I'm not sure I understand everything you said--forgive my ignorance.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'the tag' in this context.

I'm also not sure how I can get a more recent libtool than HEAD.... or did I
not get what I thought I got?  Should I be checking out an untagged cvs

So the assumption is that $CC = $CXX when using C++?  This is not always true.
While for the simple project in question it _could_ be, this seems a blatant
misuse of $CC.  Otherwise, why have $CXX at all?

Plus, autoconf makes those distinctions for me (and most people that use
libtool are using autoconf, aren't they?).

As far as submitting a patch to m4, I assumed it would always be rejected since
C++ support is unofficial.  Plus, the compiler is GCC which surely is

Thanks for the help.  I guess I'll have to decide whether to continue hacking
libtool or to mess up what I consider to be the proper use of $CC.

The question is mostly moot as I can't move more complex projects to libtool
due to the fact that it always compiles source files twice.  When using the STL
and C++, this can take a LONG time... anyone know how to tell libtool that the
object files I'm generating are all PIC, and as such the .o and .lo files are
bitwise identical?

Brett H. Williams

reply via email to

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