On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 02:22:21PM +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote: > On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 12:41:33PM +0100, strk wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 12:23:15PM +0100, strk wrote: > > > > I tracked this down to macros/libtool.m4 not matching the version > > of 'libtool' I have on this machine. > > > > So, if we use 'libtoolize --copy --force', thus replacing the ltmain.sh > > file, we should as well update macros/libtool.m4, or completely drop > > it so that the system one is used. > > > > Alternatively, we should *not* run libtoolize ? > > I think we shouldn't have libtool.m4, ltmain.sh (nor libltdl) in cvs, > but rather use the system ones, and then when Rob does a release he would > use the newest one. But as long they are in cvs, maybe running libtoolize > isn't wise.
Is there a way to call libtoolize so that it replaces the ltmain.sh *and* libtool.m4 only if newest then the available ones ? > To be more precise, I think that it would be better to remove libltdl > completly from cvs and run: > libtoolize --copy --force --ltdl > But some people allready started modifying libltdl, so it is not obvious > what to do now. Would --force check for version before replacing ? --strk; _______________________________________________ Gnash-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnash-dev
