On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 12:12:18AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > > > >Nice idea, but libtool doesn't support any of this in a portable manner > >- some OSes support DSOs having their own dependencies, a number just > >don't. > > Name a few? Or one?
In my experience, most versions of GNU libtool don't do the right thing for inter-library dependencies on Solaris or Darwin. (I've seen it barf on Linux once or twice too.) On those platforms, it may not link the dependency into the DSO and forces the main binary to link against the DSO dependency when the main binary links to the first DSO's .la file. In short, it'll usually disregard your 'cleverness' and link the binary to all of the implicit dependencies anyway. However, in certain circumstances, libtool will just fall over and screw the linking process up entirely. Subversion relies upon this working in a few cases and occassionally gets really weird error reports that have to do with libtool screwing this step up. If you *really* want to go make this work, be prepared to toss GNU libtool and spend a lot of time working on a replacement to get platform parity with GNU libtool. I think that's a really poor idea (having written a libtool-replacement myself). -- justin
