Re: Relocatable libraries with libtool--can I do it?

2004-11-25 Thread Paul Smith
%% Ralf Wildenhues [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: rw Only one question for now (I don't know enough about the problem space rw yet), concerning notation: rw _Relocatable_ IMHO is a package which can be installed (literally rw copied to) in /usr or /usr/local without any difference. rw You

Re: Relocatable libraries with libtool--can I do it?

2004-11-25 Thread Paul Smith
%% Noah Misch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: nm Several individuals have communicated similar requirements here. nm Some had partial workarounds you may find useful; check the nm archives. OK, I'll see what I can find. nm Roughly. The .la does not need to encode the $ROOT, but libtool nm

Relocatable libraries with libtool--can I do it?

2004-11-24 Thread Paul Smith
Hi all. I'm having a severe problem with libtool-ized packages, of which there are more and more these days, in my environment. I'm wondering if anyone here can suggest how I should proceed; whether there's something in libtool that will help me, or whether libtool needs enhancements, or what.

Re: GNU Libtool 1.9d released (alpha release)

2004-10-04 Thread Paul Smith
%% Bob Friesenhahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: bf I am not aware of any particular efforts to support bf cross-compilation for 2.x. The best approach is to post email bf regarding specific problems to this list (or the libtool-bugs bf list) so that they can be addressed. Progress must be