[[libtool-patches removed from Cc:]] On 6 Mar 2008, at 16:52, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 10:41:47PM CET:On 6 Mar 2008, at 15:03, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:There needs to be a way to output any warnings at the tail end of configure so that at least someone is more likely to see them. Without adequate notification to the user, the user is likely to try 'make' and then find that libtool does not work.Oo! Oo! Add that to the libtool-2.4 roadmap! :-)FWIW, I don't think that's a good request. Let the package developerput at the end what she wants to. If we start automatizing duplicating messages in Libtool or Autoconf, then in a couple of years the number of such messages will be so large that somebody will scream: "let's put the*really* important messages once more *after that*!" That's not a workable solution. The normal configure output and config.log were invented to do what Bob wants. Libtool cannot in general know what is important for the package, IMVHO. So if the functioning of a compiler is important, then configure should simply fail if the compiler does not work.
Good point. Although an LT_ macro to spew a diversion collecting libtool
configure time warnings (or similar) to make it easy for developers to
add a consistently formatted summary at the end of their configure.ac
still seems like a nice idea to me.
Cheers,
Gary
--
<=====. Email me: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/ @ @ /| Read my blog: http://blog.azazil.net
\ \\ ...and my book: http://sources.redhat.com/autobook
\^^^^^^\\
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Bug-libtool mailing list Bug-libtool@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-libtool
