"Dmitry Yaitskov" spake, saying:
> Hi guys,
>
> I dunno about rpms, but those who compile their own probably know that
> there are some problems when linking with imlib, at least with 1.3
[snip]
> After wasting about 4 hours trying to figure out why the libs imlib
> needs are not specified when it is linked I found out that the libtool
> thing that is used to link imlib is broken when it comes to
> inter-library dependencies.
[snip]
> Oops... so what I'm trying to say... it is all well and nice to
> acknowledge the fact (that it is broken), but it still *is* broken. I
> mean, the net result is that imlib is linked wrongly, and other things
> break as a result. E.g. eplus's config also does not work - it fails
> when it tries to test for imlib. Eterm does not break because it
> specifies all those other libraries explicitly, but should it?
> Etc... Is it such a good idea then to use libtool in a situation where
> it does not really work?
Agreed. Where did libtool come from, and why use it when configure
was working just fine? Is there something I don't know about (quite
possible)?
I tried for a long, long time to get gnome and all its associated tools
compiled (and there are, it seems to me, far too many underlying
requirements for some "simple" apps). I got all the way through to
the linking stage on the apps on my linux box at home, and nowhere
near that far on Solaris at work, but finally dumped the whole mess in
frustration; it's very irksome to discover the whole mess may have
been caused by an immature tool. I mean, "./configure" is one of
things that should Just Work(tm) by now, at least on most systems.
*sigh* Sorry, this just reminds me of DLL hell on a Win95 box.
</rant>
Oh, and BTW, I think eplus expects and older version of imlib (API
change? Another point for changing major version numbers. (sorry,
raster :-} I know imlib isn't officially a "production" library, but face it;
it probably should be, as it works better than many that do make that
claim. Inc the major and release it as 2.0))
> Could possibly something else be used
> instead? Does anybody know a solution to the problem? Or am I crazy
> (see subj :) and just missing something that is obvious to everybody
> else?
If you find out, please let me know :-/
> BTW, if you do link imlib with a command like the one quoted above, e
> links 'out of the box' - no need to mess around with Makefile.
Thanx; I'm sure that helps a great many people.
jim
--
Urmane Hendrake
"Apology accepted, Captain Piett." aka Jim Niemira
Darth Vader [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list send mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with the message contents: unsubscribe e-develop
