Gary, Sorry for the delay. I think I'm going to have to give up on this one. I'm afraid my understanding of libtool internals as well as Darwin -framework idiosyncracies are insufficient to the task.
Fortunately, the issue we were having with Octave compilation has been resolved by other means (actually by forcing link-all-dependencies in libtool whenever an uninstalled framework is encountered). Feel free to close this for now. If I get ambitious and figure things out more fully I will take another crack at it. On Jan 13, 2014, at 8:50 PM, Gary V. Vaughan <g...@gnu.org> wrote: > Hi Michael, > > [moved to libtool-patches list] > > On Jan 14, 2014, at 11:45 AM, Michael C. Grant <m...@cvxr.com> wrote: > >> I'm trying to compile GNU Octave and its new Qt GUI on a Mac OSX with >> Homebrew. Homebrew installs the Qt frameworks in >> /usr/local/Cellar/qt/4.8.5/lib, so after some fiddling with the configure >> script I get this: >> >> QT_LDFLAGS=-F/usr/local/Cellar/qt/4.8.5/lib >> QT_LIBS=-framework QtCore -framework QtGui -framework QtNetwork >> >> However, the libtool script does not handle the -F argument through >> properly, so it is stripped out of the linking process. >> >> I created the following patch for the generated libtool script, which causes >> libtool to treat -F exactly like it treats -L. This seems to do the trick. >> >> I did notice that scanning through past discussions that this has come up a >> couple of times, but there is reluctance to provide full support for -F for >> some reason. Perhaps the relative simplicity of this patch would convince >> you to reconsider. I'm also discussing this with the Homebrew folks to see >> if they would consider including in their formula, but they do prefer not to >> use patches if they can help it. > > Thanks for the patch. Sorry I didn't reply to your earlier emails - I marked > them for further attention, but didn't make the time to actually go back and > respond. > > My main worry is whether that changing libtool's treatment of -F is going to > do something unexpected on another platform. That said, apart from your > conflating of -L and -F in the case branches with the patch you sent, I'm > open to including it in the upcoming release if you don't mind reworking it a > little? > > Please keep the -L and -F branches separate, factoring the branch bodies into > a shell function if necessary to prevent cut-n-pasting blocks of code between > the two. Bonus points if you could also make -F behave as before on all > platforms but *-darwin*. > > If you have github, I keep a mirror of libtool at > http://github.com/gvvaughan/GNU-libtool, so that might be a more convenient > way for you to submit a pull request than dropping patch attachments into the > mailing list. > > I have a couple of small fixes of my own that I need to polish and push, and > then I'll do another round of platform testing to nail down what else is a > show-stopper for a final pre-release. > > Cheers, > -- > Gary V. Vaughan (gary AT gnu DOT org)