[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Linking against indirect dependencies
From: |
Scott James Remnant |
Subject: |
Re: Linking against indirect dependencies |
Date: |
Wed, 26 May 2004 12:07:02 -0300 |
On Wed, 2004-05-26 at 08:07 +0200, Szombathelyi György wrote:
> > Yes, I read the thread. I agree that libtool should perform the
> > optimization you want but I don't see it as something that is a
> > show-stopper.
> >
> I agree that it isn't a show-stopper, but it would be very nice if
> libtool could handle this. Can someone add this 'feature' to the libtool
> TODO list?
>
Patch was written and rejected;
The Debian libtool packages include it.
Scott
--
Have you ever, ever felt like this?
Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- Re: Linking against indirect dependencies, (continued)
- Re: Linking against indirect dependencies, Szombathelyi György, 2004/05/28
- Re: Linking against indirect dependencies, Szombathelyi György, 2004/05/25
- Re: Linking against indirect dependencies, Albert Chin, 2004/05/25
- Re: Linking against indirect dependencies, Szombathelyi György, 2004/05/26
- Re: Linking against indirect dependencies, Bob Friesenhahn, 2004/05/26
- Re: Linking against indirect dependencies, Alexandre Oliva, 2004/05/29
- Re: Linking against indirect dependencies, Szombathelyi György, 2004/05/29
- Re: Linking against indirect dependencies, Alexandre Oliva, 2004/05/29
- RE: Linking against indirect dependencies, Howard Chu, 2004/05/29
- Re: Linking against indirect dependencies, Szombathelyi György, 2004/05/31
- Re: Linking against indirect dependencies,
Scott James Remnant <=
- Re: Linking against indirect dependencies, Szombathelyi György, 2004/05/27
Re: Linking against indirect dependencies, Szombathelyi György, 2004/05/26