libtool
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: TODO


From: Scott James Remnant
Subject: Re: TODO
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 15:56:59 +0000

On Mon, 2004-11-15 at 15:51 +0000, Joe Orton wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 15, 2004 at 02:42:51PM +0000, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > On Mon, 2004-11-15 at 13:16 +0000, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> > 
> > > Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > > >>>>Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>They're both trying to deal with platforms like Solaris that don't 
> > > >>>>>have
> > > >>>>>a needed-following link loader.
> > > 
> > > > The patch that is in Debian's libtool?
> > > 
> > > It is?  I'll defer to Scott...
> > > 
> > Yes.  When you're making a distribution, Libtool's behaviour of directly
> > linking indirect-dependencies is insane.  For a SONAME change to a
> > library deep in the stack, that only affects the library immediately
> > above it, you suddenly need to rebuild your entire desktop environment.
> 
> How does libtool know that the SONAME change only affects the library
> above it?  What if there is a structure exposed through multiple levels
> of libraries or something like that?  I can think of several cases where
> doing this by default in libtool would be unsafe.
> 
Then those additional levels should directly link to the shared
libraries they depend on.

This is just correct practice.

Scott
-- 
Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen?  Are you going round the twist?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


reply via email to

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