On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 05:20:05PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: > On Fri, 25 May 2007 11:27:08 -0400, "Charles Wilson" said: > > On May 4, 2007, Charles Wilson wrote: > > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool-patches/2007-04/msg00088.html
> Ping * 3. I don't speak for the Libtool maintainers, but I'll throw out my impressions of the patch, in case it might help move things along. Not using Cygwin or MSYS myself these days, I trust that the patch improves things there as you say it does. It seems fairly harmless from the perspective of all other platforms. Long-term, we can revise this cumbersome division of work between the executable wrapper and the wrapper script. Ideally, the wrapper methodology for Unix should resemble that for Cygwin/MSYS, so we don't have an extra code path potentially subject to bitrot. This patch does not introduce those problems, however, and seems to improve the current situation. >From a purely Unix-centric standpoint, I would pass the script to a shell via a pipe, rather than writing it out to a file. Is that too much for MSYS? One specific thought: > + # cygwin/mingw cwrapper will rewrite this line: > + WRAPPER_SCRIPT_BELONGS_IN_OBJDIR=no ... > + func_emit_libtool_wrapper_script | > + $SED -e 's/\([\\"]\)/\\\1/g' \ > + -e 's/\(WRAPPER_SCRIPT_BELONGS_IN_OBJDIR\)=.*/\1=yes/' \ > + -e 's/^/"/' -e 's/$/\\n"/' This will be cleaner if you pass the value of WRAPPER_SCRIPT_BELONGS_IN_OBJDIR as an argument to func_emit_libtool_wrapper_script, rather than hard-coding the "no" and filtering it after the fact. Hope that's useful.
