Re: tabularized libtool

[Bruce Korb]

Tom Lord wrote:

> Finally, I still wish that a side-effect of the libtool effort was a
> document/database that explained clearly and concisely how to deal
> with shared libraries in various environments.   As it stands, that
> information is weaved into convoluted code and the situation is
> glossed over with "trust us -- we're building the right abstractions".

That is part of the intent of the "binary-branch" (if anyone
still remembers it).  My first step was just accommodating the
lack of shell functions so I could strip down the clutter to
a manageable size.  I never have found much time to go much
further, but the idea is to make the thing a shell program
driver that feeds the shell a vastly smaller set of commands
that do only what's needed.  Eventually, it could be gotten
to drive the compilers and linkers directly, but a lot of stuff
would come first.  My spare time does not seem to be copious.