VP-RX will take your sex life to new levels...
Guaranteéd!
Your penís will grow up to 3 ínches
Your erectíons will be rock hard
Your sex drive will be supercharged
Your orgasms will be more intense
Your partner will be astounded
Clíck here to get VP-RX
now!
No more please
In regard to: Re: LD_RUN_PATH not adding paths when building with shared...:
>On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 05:36:50PM -0500, Tim Mooney wrote:
>
>> Are you assuming LD_RUN_PATH is something that's honored on IRIX because
>> you've seen it honored on other platforms (e.g. Solaris?). If you've
>> seen i
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 05:36:50PM -0500, Tim Mooney wrote:
> Are you assuming LD_RUN_PATH is something that's honored on IRIX because
> you've seen it honored on other platforms (e.g. Solaris?). If you've
> seen it documented somewhere that it should work on IRIX, can you provide
> information o
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Luigi Ballabio wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 17:42:26 -0500, Tim Mooney wrote:
>
> Tim,
> thanks for the tip. I just installed libtool 1.5, and the
> problem does persist.
The CVS version of libtool contains fixes to ensure that library paths
are not re-ordered. The 1.5
Tom Howard writes:
> That's my point. My understanding of Stephen problem is that he doesn't want
> to build/install the companion files.
[...]
> So in his situation, patching libtool and using -shared isn't really going to
> solve his problem. Correct?
As already pointed out by Daniel Reed, -a
On Aug 29, 2003, at 12:55 AM, Daniel Reed wrote:
To produce only .la and .so files, you can pass -module -avoid-version
to
libtool. In Automake, you can do this by using something similar to:
pkglib_LTLIBRARIES = mymod.la
mymod_la_SOURCES = mymod.c
mymod_la_LDFLAGS = -module -avoid-version
This
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 17:42:26 -0500, Tim Mooney wrote:
> Luigi Ballabio said (at 11:23am...:
>
>>What am I doing wrong?
>>
>>Thanks,
>> Luigi
>>
>>P.S. Almost forgetting: libtool 1.4.3, automake 1.7.6,
>>autoconf 2.57
>
> The libtool maintainers want to focus their efforts on libtool 1.5, and
Hi Ralph,
On Friday 29 August 2003 16:53, Schleicher Ralph (LLI) wrote:
> In libtool jargon, ".so file" is a synonym for a shared library.
> This includes all companion files, but their names and number
> depend on libtool's configuration and build options. E.g., HP-UX
> uses .sl instead of .so f
Tom Howard writes:
> Sorry if I'm being dense, but (after reading the referenced messages) I don't
> understand why using the -shared flag will only produce the a .so file.
> Won't it still produce a .so.X, .so.X.X.X and .la files as well?
In libtool jargon, ".so file" is a synonym for a shared l
On 2003-08-29T14:14+1000, Tom Howard wrote:
) On Thursday 28 August 2003 16:08, Schleicher Ralph (LLI) wrote:
) > > So by patching my libtool I should be able to put the -shared flag in my
) > > AM_LDFLAGS for the Makefile.am and only get the shared.so file right?
) > Yes, but it makes sense adding
Hi,
On Thursday 28 August 2003 16:08, Schleicher Ralph (LLI) wrote:
> > So by patching my libtool I should be able to put the -shared flag in my
> > AM_LDFLAGS for the Makefile.am and only get the shared.so file right?
>
> Yes, but it makes sense adding it to CFLAGS, too.
Sorry if I'm being dense
On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 05:36:50PM -0500, Tim Mooney wrote:
> Are you assuming LD_RUN_PATH is something that's honored on IRIX because
> you've seen it honored on other platforms (e.g. Solaris?). If you've
> seen it documented somewhere that it should work on IRIX, can you provide
> information o
12 matches
Mail list logo
