[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: normal ltdl linking suggestions?

From: Benoit SIGOURE
Subject: Re: normal ltdl linking suggestions?
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 09:29:30 +0200

On Jul 9, 2007, at 10:54 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:

On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:

Hi Gary,

On Monday 09 July 2007 17:47:13 Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
All the world is not Linux.  By not shipping libltdl at all, you're
making life difficult for the users of hundreds of other platforms who will have to install their own libltdl just to build your package, which many
will likely decide is too much effort.

well, my software works on linux, netbsd, freebsd, openbsd, dragonflybsd, debian/bsd debian/hurd, mac os X, solaris and windows, and i think I got
success reports about aix and hpux, and embedded linux systems.
I don't remember getting negative reports, so don't think the current
situation without a copy of ltdl is bad. also at least two projects are
libraries used by other applications, in one situation the library is
actually an implemention of an ABI plugin standard.

Your approach is outright heresy. With this approach, users would simply install a copy of GNU 'autobuild' prior to building all other packages. This would result in no need for embedded autoconf, automake, and libtool in all the packages. Shame on you for suggesting such an approach. Go stand in a corner.

I'm not sure I understand why you're saying this. Did you mean s/no need/need/?

Benoit Sigoure aka Tsuna
EPITA Research and Development Laboratory

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

reply via email to

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