Re: [RFC] Streamlining Binding Installation

On Thu, Sep 02, 2004 at 01:36:44PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> Without tossing libtool, I don't think so.
>
> The only way the regular tests work is that they call out to our svn*
> executables which happen to be libtool shell scripts that tweak the
> environment and binaries (!) that trick the system into thinking it's
> loading from the installed directory. (Take a look and you'll see what I
> mean.) And note that the in-place testing we do now doesn't necessarily
> work on all OSes either. libtool doesn't know how to trick Mac OS X into
> ignoring the installed libraries - so test cases always fail for me until I
> install.
>
> Python, Java, and Perl are going to require an even greater level of
> trickery. I'll note that httpd's test suite is a standalone suite that
> requires installation. I just think we're going to end up with the same
> solution (by and large) for our bindings.

The Perl bindings test in tree just fine already. It even works on OS
X. :)

Yes we're not using libtool. But APR does provide us a way to find out
how to ask for libs on a different path:
apr-config --shlib-path-var

When I tightened up the integration of the Perl bindings a while back I
added a variable for configure the replace to get this:
@SVN_APR_SHLIB_PATH_VAR@

So I don't think it's necessary to ditch libtool to get this
functionality. We just have to use some APR functionality and ignore
the libtool functionality that doesn't work right.

-- 
Ben Reser <ben@reser.org>
http://ben.reser.org
"Conscience is the inner voice which warns us somebody may be looking."
- H.L. Mencken
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org