autotools hurts my brain; it's a monster out of control
Adam Jackson
ajax at redhat.com
Fri Dec 5 16:23:33 UTC 2008
On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 10:29 +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 12:28:44AM -0500, Peter Jones wrote:
> > Responding to the correct mailing list for this discussion. Cc:ing the other one.
> >
> > Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> John Dennis wrote:
> >>> I've had my fill of autotool problems (especially libtool)
> >>
> >> Don't throw in libtool with the rest. libtool was available in the
> >> spirit of the auto tools only in its very first version (which of those
> >> reading this only Jim and Tom will know). Then came the windows and
> >> HP-SUX idiots and ruined it. I've for the longest time said libtool
> >> should not be used (and I don't do it in my code). In the worst case a
> >> simple Linux-only replacement for libtool should be used.
> >
> > I agree that a Linux-only replacement for libtool should be used, if at
> > all. So why isn't there one available in Fedora that deps on "libtool"
> > will pick by default?
>
> No one has explained yet how these packages that don't use libtool
> will work when cross-compiling to Windows (or on HP-SUX / all the
> other platforms that have different ways to make shared libraries).
>
> Really: use libtool, it helps.
gcc -shared works on windows now, you know.
If the assertion is that we still need to care about non-gnu toolchains,
then that's one thing, but if all libtool is doing is wrapping gcc, then
it's worse than useless.
- ajax
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20081205/83e6b18b/attachment.sig>
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list