On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 03:23:08PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | >>>>> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > | > | Andre> On Sun, Mar 25, 2007 at 10:31:24PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes > | Andre> wrote: > | >> >>>>> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz > | >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > | >> > | Andre> libtool is a waste of time in the year 2007. That's certainly > | Andre> just my opinion, but anyway. I also believe the kind of > | Andre> variations between different version of Unix leading to and > | Andre> rectifying the existance of autotools are gone nowadays (with > | Andre> Linux as the only surviving variety, the rest is dead even if > | Andre> the coroner's still out in some cases). > | >> I think the code we had in the pre-libtool era was perfectly > | >> suitable. > | > | Andre> Suitable for what? > | > | Compiling LyX. > | > | Lars' big reason for using libtool, AFAIR, was that that would allow > | us to build parts of LyX as shared libraries. In practice, we have > | never done that. > > Currently we can only flip a switch if we want to. > > If we stop using recursive make (and automake supports this) we might > be able to do without the convenience libs.
I would like to see real numbers from this direction. I think getting rid of the recursive make would already be beneficial. Andre'
