[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Peter O'Gorman - [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> I am pretty sure that you can similarly avoid the need for a fake >> convenience .la, but can not work it out without actually attempting a >> build :) > > On a related note, I'm working with a non-libtool library (we'll call it > x) that ships libxz.a and libx.so. So a static build uses -lxz and a > shared build uses -lx. To use this in an autotools project, I wrote a > libmy_x.la.in with @variables@ to be determined by the configure script. > Thus both flavors can now specify -lmy_x. > > Is there a better way to handle libs with different static/shared names, > or is this another place where the fake convenience library is appropriate?
Please do not respond to me directly, instead ask on the list. Peter -- Peter O'Gorman http://pogma.com _______________________________________________ http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
