[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: LT_* equivalent to AC_CHECK_LIB?

From: Bob Friesenhahn
Subject: Re: LT_* equivalent to AC_CHECK_LIB?
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 15:32:18 -0500 (CDT)

On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Albert Chin wrote:

On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 02:20:45PM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
Autoconf can not depend on libtool, so Autoconf should not provide
such a macro, but it certainly makes sense for libtool to provide a
LT_CHECK_LIB as you describe.

I disagree. Users shouldn't have to go through any more effort to use
libtool. Libtool should replace things like AC_CHECK_LIB,
AC_TRY_COMPILE, etc. with invocations to use ./libtool rather than
$CC, $CXX, etc.

In this case, users would be doing less work. With the current scheme, portable software needs to know about all of the library dependencies in order for AC_CHECK_LIB to work at all. This can be a lot of work and is a common point of failure. The current workaround is to use a -config script to obtain library dependency info.

Unfortunately, various OS distributions have made a habit of deleting the .la files so a LT_CHECK_LIB would not be as helpful as it might appear.

Bob Friesenhahn
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,

reply via email to

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