[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: TODO
From: |
Noah Misch |
Subject: |
Re: TODO |
Date: |
Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:02:01 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.6i |
On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 01:17:19AM +0100, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> - the relinking dependency debacle:
>
> For libtool to relink libraries when installing them, all
> dependencies must have been installed. However automake cannot
> pre-compute this installation order when it is run, and
> computing it at compile-time look overly complicated and error
> prone. Instead, would it make sense to support a two-stage
The core problem appears to be that an Automake-generated Makefile.in uses
dependencies when building installable products but then installs them in
destination_PRIMARY batches without observing the dependencies it already knows.
Indeed, if Automake did not know the dependency graph of each object, it could
not build them reliably.
If Automake generated an install target for installable product, just as it
generated a build target, would that not solve this problem? Like so:
-- Makefile.am
lib_LTLIBRARIES = foo.la bar.la
foo_la_LIBADD = bar.la
-- Makefile.in
foo.la: bar.la
$(LIBTOOL) ...
install-foo.la: install-bar.la
$(INSTALL) ...
install-bar.la:
$(INSTALL) ...
- Re: TODO, (continued)
- Re: TODO, Ralf Wildenhues, 2004/11/09
- Re: TODO, Scott James Remnant, 2004/11/10
Re: TODO, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/11/09
Re: TODO,
Noah Misch <=
- Re: TODO, Bob Friesenhahn, 2004/11/10
- Re: TODO, Noah Misch, 2004/11/10
- Re: TODO, Bob Friesenhahn, 2004/11/10
- Re: TODO, Ralf Wildenhues, 2004/11/10
- Re: TODO, Noah Misch, 2004/11/10
- Re: TODO, Bob Friesenhahn, 2004/11/10
Re: TODO, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2004/11/10
Re: TODO, Noah Misch, 2004/11/11
Re: TODO, Ralf Wildenhues, 2004/11/15