On 4/15/14, 5:00 AM, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Is there a specific reason not to build readline with libtool,
> but maintain all the sharedlib platform details locally?
libtool is large, slow, overly complicated, and introduces tremendous
overhead for even the simplest tasks.
> At the moment I'm preparing a patch to allow for using externally
> provided libtool as fallback, in case @SHARED_TARGET@ is empty
> because of --disable-shared or SHLIB_STATUS=unsupported.
Is there some existing system for which this (unsupported) is an actual
problem?
Chet
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU [email protected] http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/
_______________________________________________
Bug-readline mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-readline
