[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [RFC] Moving and libtool.m4 into Automake

From: Gary V. Vaughan
Subject: Re: [RFC] Moving and libtool.m4 into Automake
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 20:08:07 +0700

On Oct 18, 2012, at 7:08 PM, Peter Rosin <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi Gary!

Hi Peter,

> On 2012-10-17 11:41, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
>> If the consensus is that Automake is not a good home for the libtool
>> compiler wrapper, then I still plan to split Libtool into two projects
>> as outlined above to decouple and simplify somewhat -- although I have
>> some other things to attend to first, so it will not happen right away,
>> but more likely after the next release.
> I'm working on some libltdl preloader issues with MSVC, and I must say
> that the preloader is rather tightly coupled with libtool, with symbol
> lookup table generation for libltdl in the libtool script. Your description
> above feels like an attempt to describe the situation in a way that is
> a little bit too simplistic. The patches I currently have for the MSVC
> issues feels like the kind of stuff you would not want to coordinate
> between two packages. So, what's the plan regarding the preloader in the
> libltdl/libtool split? Where will e.g. func_generate_dlsyms sit? That
> function is clearly an libltdl thing which interacts with libltdl
> internals, but I don't see any really good alternative to having that
> code inside the libtool script.

I haven't worked through the actual implementation yet, though I recently
pushed some patches that move into the same pluggable
framework that my bootstrap script uses, so I think it will not be difficult
to have the libltdl half of the split install a libtool plugin that carries the
preloader extensions.

Gary V. Vaughan (gary AT gnu DOT org)

reply via email to

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