[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: How can I link with libguile?

From: Albert Chin
Subject: Re: How can I link with libguile?
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 13:25:08 -0600
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i

On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 10:16:04AM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote:
> Albert Chin wrote:
> > 
> > On Sun, Jan 12, 2003 at 04:24:02PM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote
> in :
> > > ``libguile'' lives in a place where LD_LIBRARY_PATH must be set
> > > (viz., /opt/sfw/lib).   What is wrong?  What should I be doing to
> > > tell libtool that it has to add a ``-R/opt/sfw/lib'' or something?
> > > If I use ``guile-config'' first, I'll override ``--with-libguile''.
> > > So much pain.  :-(
> > 
> > We solve this by building like so:
> >   $ LDFLAGS="-R[path to guile library]" ./configure
> > 
> > And, in the specific case of guile, we modify guile-config to output
> > -L[path to guile libraries] *and* -R[path to guile libraries].
> :-(
> Several problems:
> 1.  There seems to be something funny about the way links work on
>     the Source Forge compile farm.  The linker (invoked as "gcc")
>     knows where to find free software libraries ("/opt/fsw/lib"),
>     but it doesn't pass this knowledge along to the run time loader.
>     Is this expected behavior, or a Source Forge issue?  Should my
>     link test be changed to a run test?  Doing that would trigger
>     the invocation of "guile-config".  In any event, on the compile
>     farm, my test believes that it can compile and link without
>     anything more special than ``-lguile'' on the link line (no "-I"
>     either).

Run with gcc -v and see what's happening. If during the build of
autogen you must run a program which depends on libguile, change your
link to a test.

> 2.  On Solaris, libtool ought to take "-L" args and duplicate them
>     as "-R" args, yes?  Or, is that too simple?

*ICK* *ICK* *ICK*!

> 3.  As the author of a *-config script, how would I know when to
>     add the "-R" thingey?  Would libtool strip it if it weren't
>     needed on a particular platform?  Do you (Albert) add the
>     -R/path/to/libopts on my script, too?  Is there a configure
>     test to check for the need of adding "-R"?

I add -R/path/to/libopts for *every* *-config script (ditto for
pkgconfig scripts). Testing for -R won't help you on Tru64 UNIX, IRIX,
Redhat Linux, AIX, etc. Libtool does accept -R/path/to/lib and will
convert -R to the proper switch for the platform in question. However,
this doesn't help during ./configure.

> P.S.:  Dan Kegel asked:
> > Is guile-config reliably installed for versions of guile
> > later than some number X?
> Answer:  No.  It is a special issue with Red Hat.  They set the
> prefix to "/usr" so that no special configury is required, so
> nobody needs to consult "guile-config".  That means that just
> because you cannot find "guile-config" it doesn't mean that
> Guile has not been installed.  SO:  step 1, let someone tell you
> where to find it.  Failing that, step 2, try to use it anyway.
> If *that* fails, then, finally, go find "guile-config".  Maybe
> I should switch steps 2 and 3, but it led to such a complicated
> shell script/autoconf macro....Red Hat should distribute the script.

I think you should do the following:
  1. Try to link and run against -lguile.
  2. Look for guile-config and repeat #1.
  3. Fail with a decent AC_ERROR.

At the same time, I'd add the following autoconf options:
  --with-guile-config=[path to guile-config]
  --with-guile=[base path of guile installation]
  --with-guile-includes=[path to guile includes]
  --with-guile-libraries=[path to guile libraries]

--with-guile would:
  CPPFLAGS="$CPPFLAGS -I$withval/include"
  LDFLAGS="$LDFLAGS -L$withval/lib"
--with-guile-includes would:
  CPPFLAGS="$CPPFLAGS -I$withval/include"
--with-guile-libraries would:
  LDFLAGS="$LDFLAGS -L$withval/lib"

--with-guile is of course optional if you choose --with-guile-includes
and --with-guile-libraries.

BTW, this is OT for libtool.

albert chin (address@hidden)

reply via email to

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