[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: LT_* equivalent to AC_CHECK_LIB?

From: Albert Chin
Subject: Re: LT_* equivalent to AC_CHECK_LIB?
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 15:15:57 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6i

On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 01:52:36PM -0500, Tim Mooney wrote:
> Is there a libtool-aware equivalent to AC_CHECK_LIB?  In other
> words, if I want to check for foo_amazing_func() in libfoo, and
> libfoo was built with libtool (and the is hopefully
> installed on the system), is there an extant macro something like
> LT_CHECK_LIB(foo,foo_amazing_func) that will try find
> foo_amazing_func() in libfoo *and* will pull in all the necessary
> dependencies for libfoo, automatically?
> The specific case I'm looking at is for a package that wants to
> check for libneon.  Neon (which is a libtool library) might have
> been linked against OpenSSL (which might require pthread libraries
> and/or krb5 libraries), and definitely requires one of libxml2
> (which might have requirements like zlib, pthread, libm, et. al.) or
> expat.  If I want to check for libneon at configure time, using just
> AC_CHECK_LIB or AC_SEARCH_LIB will be extremely painful, because
> even with the fourth argument to either of those macros, I'll still
> have to write a battery of configure tests to figure out which
> particular combination of libraries is required to get libneon and
> its dependencies.  If there's a libtool-aware equivalent macro, it
> would be so much easier.

Is libneon a static library? If not, and libneon has the 3rd-party
libraries as dependencies, why shouldn't linking with just -lneon

albert chin (address@hidden)

reply via email to

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