Paul Eggert asks:
> First, can you write up some documentation for it, suitable for use
> in the Autoconf manual?
Sure. But first I'd like to know Akim's opinion in general.
Bruno
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh asks:
> is it easy to _disable_ such feature? We have our own reasons for
> not wanting rpath information in our Debian packages
Yes. You simply specify --prefix=/nonexistent at configuration time.
At installation time you use "make install DESTDIR=/tmp/destdir" and
On Wed, 22 May 2002, Bruno Haible wrote:
> > is it easy to _disable_ such feature? We have our own reasons for
> > not wanting rpath information in our Debian packages
>
> Yes. You simply specify --prefix=/nonexistent at configuration time.
> At installation time you use "make install DESTDIR=/t
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
> This is very un-optimal. Some programs embed the prefix path to find other
> files, and those would break quite hard.
Oh, I gave an advice suitable for building relocatable binary
packages. If that's not what you are doing, then please, can you tell
why you
Barring any further input from anyone, it seems like we've reached a
consensus on this proposal. The final version is included below.
Paul or Akim, can one of you tell me how to procede with this? Should
I submit a patch, or would you prefer to implement these changes
yourselves?
Thanks for th
On Wed, 22 May 2002, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
> > This is very un-optimal. Some programs embed the prefix path to find other
> > files, and those would break quite hard.
>
> Oh, I gave an advice suitable for building relocatable binary
> packages. If that's not wh
>>> "Henrique" == Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
Henrique> We use ld.so.conf and the ld.so linker itself only,
Wouldn't it be enough to teach `config.rpath' to *not* output
`-rpath DIR' when `DIR' is already searched by `ld.so'?
Like Libtool does (see `$sys_lib_
On Wed, 22 May 2002, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> >>> "Henrique" == Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Henrique> We use ld.so.conf and the ld.so linker itself only,
>
> Wouldn't it be enough to teach `config.rpath' to *not* output
> `-rpath DIR' when `DIR' is already sea
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh writes:
> I am not doing anything of the sort. We are usually downstream maintainers
> in Debian. But lots of upstream autoconf scripts use $prefix to set the
> default path for modules ...
>
> As for rpath in the distribution: We don't want rpath because rpath kills
Alexandre Duret-Lutz writes:
> Wouldn't it be enough to teach `config.rpath' to *not* output
> `-rpath DIR' when `DIR' is already searched by `ld.so'?
> Like Libtool does (see `$sys_lib_search_path').
The AC_LIB_LINKFLAGs macro does not output '-rpath DIR' when DIR is an
apparent known director
Can I request that cf77 and cft77 get removed from the list of Fortran
compilers to try? They are both old and I was surprised to find them on
the system. Neither one passes the configure tests while f90 (for years
the recommended compiler) does:
% uname -a
sn3306 chilkoot 10.0.1.0 jlm.3 CRAY SV1
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Many of our porters hate libtool with vengeance (or worse)
I certainly do. As a guy who routinely cross-compiles
applications for embedded systems, I can testify that
libtool is a broken pain in the ass sometimes.
- Dan
On Wed May 22 10:36 2002 -0500, Mark D. Roth wrote:
> Barring any further input from anyone, it seems like we've reached a
> consensus on this proposal. The final version is included below.
Actually, I just realized that using a single include macro to handle
both the local files and the system-
On Wed, 22 May 2002, Bruno Haible wrote:
> OK, I see. You are building non-relocatable packages in general, but
> still want libraries to be relocatable in case of major system
> surgery, and the /etc/ld.so.conf file is completely satisfactory for
> your purpose. Right?
Yes.
> I think a configur
> From: "Mark D. Roth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 13:56:33 -0500
>
> * autoconf's search path should be:
> 1. the current directory (i.e., $top_srcdir)
But the current directory is not top_srcdir in all cases.
E.g. an include file in one directory might include another.
Hi,
I noticed that setting LIBOBJS manually in 2.53 now produces an error, but
I think the way this is implemented goes a bit too far:
$ cat configure.ac
AC_INIT
test -z "$LIBOBJS"
$ autoconf
configure.ac:2: error: do not use LIBOBJS directly, use AC_LIBOBJ [...]
I don't think examining (witho
On Wed May 22 15:50 2002 -0700, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On Wed, 22 May 2002 13:56:33 -0500, Mark D. Roth wrote:
> > * autoconf's search path should be:
> > 1. the current directory (i.e., $top_srcdir)
>
> But the current directory is not top_srcdir in all cases.
> E.g. an include file in one
On Wed May 22 21:40 2002 -0500, Mark D. Roth wrote:
> On Wed May 22 15:50 2002 -0700, Paul Eggert wrote:
> > My own reaction is positive, but I would suggest that you write up the
> > proposal, as a proposed patch to the manual. (Often the documentation
> > is the hardest to write, so perhaps it'
18 matches
Mail list logo
