Re: AIX shared libraries, make install misses them

[Daniel Pocock]

Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hello Daniel,
>
> * Daniel Pocock wrote on Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 03:21:24PM CET:
>   
> > > We have been working on getting the Ganglia tarball to work out of
> > > the box for AIX
> > >       
>
>   
> > > When Michael does `make install', the *.so files for our modules
> > > are not installed.  Instead, he sees output like this from `make
> > > install':
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > /opt/freeware/bin/bash ../../../libtool   --mode=install
> > > ../../../build/install-sh -c  'modcpu.la'
> > > '/var/tmp/gg/lib/ganglia/modcpu.la'
> > > ../../../build/install-sh -c .libs/modcpu.a
> > > /var/tmp/gg/lib/ganglia/modcpu.a
> > > ../../../build/install-sh -c .libs/modcpu.lai
> > > /var/tmp/gg/lib/ganglia/modcpu.la
> > >       
>
>   
> > > I've looked at the file gmond/modules/cpu/.libs/modcpu.la on AIX:
> > >
> > > ...
> > > dlname='modcpu.so'
> > > library_names='modcpu.a modcpu.a'
> > > old_library=''
> > >       
>
> Is that without or with runtimelinking enabled (LDFLAGS=-Wl,-brtl passed
> to configure)?  If without, then libtool puts the modcpu.so file into
> the modcpu.a archive (the way AIX does with its system modules as well)
> and that is to be expected.
>
> With runtimelinking, the .so file should be a separate file.
>   
That makes sense - I don't believe Michael has run it with the different 
LDFLAGS yet.

However, nothing gets installed - if the default behavior is to create 
modcpu.a, then shouldn't `make install' result in the installation of 
modcpu.a?

For changing LDFLAGS, I'd rather include this into configure.in, so it 
will be set automatically for AIX platforms.  Can you make any 
suggestions on that?  The project involves building some static 
libraries, shared libraries, and linking some of the static libraries to 
create an executable too.  Will option be necessary for all such 
targets, or do I need to use it selectively?
> BTW, you didn't specify any bug or misbehavior that you see, so maybe
> everything else works as expected?
>   
Yes, an earlier email I have from Michael says that it runs if the 
modules are copied over manually - I'm not sure if he was copying *.a or 
*.so however.

>   
> > > Finally, Michael reports that if he bootstraps again with his own
> > > autoconf, make install does work.
> > >
> > > Here is Michael's autotools versions:
> > >
> > > autoconf-2.64-1
> > > automake-1.11.1-1
> > > libtool-1.5.26-1
> > > libtool-ltdl-1.5.26-1
> > > libtool-ltdl-devel-1.5.26-1
> > > m4-1.4.13-1
> > >
> > > And here are the versions on Debian 5 (used for bootstrapping the
> > > release tarball):
> > >
> > > autoconf 2.61-8
> > > automake 1:1.10.1-3
> > > libtool 1.5.26-4
> > > m4 1.4.11-1
> > >
> > > Is there any way we can get this working using the existing
> > > autotools version?
> > >       
>
> Well, I really don't know the differences between libtool-1.5.26-1 and
> libtool 1.5.26-4 (this really all is a libtool issue, not an Automake
> one), but if there were bugs in either, I'd first ask you to retry with
> 2.2.6b anyway.
>
>   
> > Another problem I have just discovered, on Cygwin, I have to patch
> > libtool, adding the line
> >
> > echo="echo"
> >
> > otherwise I get lot's of errors along the lines of "Xgcc command not found"
> >     
>
> This is a pretty sure sign that you have mixed up macros from one
> Libtool version with a ltmain.sh file from another Libtool version.
> Perchance your aclocal.m4 or acinclude.m4 files contain old Libtool
> macro definitions?
>   
I'll be checking that out shortly - thanks for this tip