On Tue, 29 Jun 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Peter Breitenlohner wrote on Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 10:36:32AM CEST:
Here the macro we are using in TeX Live for such tests (C and C++). Our
purpose is to test properties of libraries that can be either
(1) uninstalled libtool libraries already built when this configure runs,
or (2) installed libraries -- libtool or not.
Good stuff. Are you willing to turn this into a patch against git
Libtool? Otherwise we'll put it on our todo list. You might need
to sign papers though, at least if you're adding test coverage.
Hi Ralf,
see below.
A general set of macros could be LT_USE_LIBTOOL_PUSH and _POP and could
adjust the AC_LANG setting of all configured libtool tags; the pop macro
could reset them to their original state afterwards; that would help for
encapsulation. Or some better names I can't think of right now.
# _KPSE_USE_LIBTOOL()
# ---
AC_DEFUN([_KPSE_USE_LIBTOOL],
[## $0: Generate a libtool script for use in configure tests
AC_PROVIDE_IFELSE([LT_INIT], ,
[m4_fatal([$0: requires libtool])])[]dnl
LT_OUTPUT
m4_append([AC_LANG(C)],
[ac_link=./libtool --mode=link --tag=CC $ac_link
])[]dnl
AC_PROVIDE_IFELSE([AC_PROG_CXX],
[m4_append([AC_LANG(C++)],
[ac_link=./libtool --mode=link --tag=CXX $ac_link
])])[]dnl
AC_LANG(_AC_LANG)[]dnl
]) # _KPSE_USE_LIBTOOL
Please feel free to use the basic idea which is simple enough and might not
require paperwork, but I would prefer that you put this on your todo list
and have it handled by someone thoroughly familiar with libtool internals
(which I am certainly not).
Our macro perfectly serves our needs, but probably needs to be improved in
several respects (not counting the PUSH/POP generalization), e.g.,
(1) cover all languages. Should there be a one-to-one correspondence
between AC_PROG_FOO/AC_LANG(foo)/--tag=FOO? I am thinking in particular of
ObjC/ObjC++ that might need libtool tags or could use tags CC/CXX. (For TeX
Live we have ObjC/ObjC++ source files but don't have to run test for these
languages.)
(2) There may be subtleties about the ordering of Autoconf macros:
LT_INIT
AC_PROG_CXX
has the same effect as
AC_PROG_CXX
LT_INIT
but I don't know is if
LT_INIT
LT_OUTPUT
AC_PROG_CXX
also has the same effect as
LT_INIT
AC_PROG_CXX
LT_OUTPUT
Regards
Peter Breitenlohner p...@mppmu.mpg.de
