On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:15:49AM -0400, Greg Hudson wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-04-21 at 12:26 +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > If we can replace automake madness, we can certainly replace libtool
> > madness, too. I really wonder why it has not been done yet.
>
> automake is a build system organization tool. It's very easy to replace
> on a per-project basis because all it does is translate a description of
> the project sources into a set of Makefile rules, which is (for a given
> project) a very contained problem.
>
> libtool, like autoconf, is a portability tool. It's very hard to
> replace on a per-project basis because very few projects have access to
> hardware for every operating system (and version) that they might want
> to be built on, or sufficient expertise in the workings of shared
> libraries on those systems. libtool also does some really heroic stuff,
> like relinking binaries for use in the build tree to address the
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH/DT_RPATH priority issue.
>
> That said, if you abandon libtool, certain options open up to you on
> certain platforms. You can pass --enable-new-dtags on Linux to use
> DT_RUNPATH (which doesn't take priority over LD_LIBRARY_PATH) instead of
> DT_RPATH (which does). You can supply a list of symbol names to export,
> causing other symbol names to remain hidden. You can do symbol
> versioning, which would allow multiple versions of the Subversion
> libraries to coexist within an application (which is probably not a good
> idea, admittedly).
Thanks, good points. Sounds like I'll have a lot of learning to do
before I can tackle this... *sigh*
Stefan
Received on 2009-04-22 13:02:57 CEST