Re: autotools not suited to proprietary development?

2006-10-05 Thread Ryan McDougall
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 21:33 -0700, Andre Stechert wrote: On Oct 4, 2006, at 8:55 PM, Ryan McDougall wrote: However the problem remains that Im at a bit of a loss how to ship a shared .SO library easily. If I build on my machine (or a set of supported build machines) then the build will

Re: autotools not suited to proprietary development?

2006-10-05 Thread Tim Van Holder
Ryan McDougall wrote: should I understand that (for example) when redhat/debian build lets say libc for packaging as a binary, they download a tarball and do a complicated form './configure --prefix=/usr make make install' on a bare machine without any libc, then tar up the result for an

Re: autotools not suited to proprietary development?

2006-10-05 Thread Russ Allbery
Ryan McDougall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: should I understand that (for example) when redhat/debian build lets say libc for packaging as a binary, they download a tarball and do a complicated form './configure --prefix=/usr make make install' on a bare machine without any libc, then tar up

Re: autotools not suited to proprietary development?

2006-10-05 Thread Russ Allbery
Tim Van Holder [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: They do the equivalent of extract tarball apply distro patches ./configure --prefix=/usr other switches as needed make (possibly make check instead) make install DESTDIR=distro package staging area cd distro package staging area

Re: Dependence on object files listed in link script

2006-10-05 Thread Tzu-Chien Chiu
2006/10/4, Stepan Kasal [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 11:59:40AM +0800, Tzu-Chien Chiu wrote: bar_LDADD = @top_builddir@/xyz.la bar_DEPENDENCIES = $(bar_LDADD) @many_objs@ a few nits first: all AC_SUBSTed variables are available as make variables, so you can use $(top_builddir)