On Tue, 2010-09-21 at 14:50 -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > libtool 2.x is better than 1.x, which made it impossible to correctly > build 64-bit libraries on Solaris, since it hardcoded in the libtool > script the ld flag for 64-bit builds, and thus failed when using > $(LD)=$(CC) as recommended to ensure the right language-specific > bits/flags are passed to the linker by the compiler. >
We just had a discussion about making libtool v2 the minimum required version. I did not investigate thoroughly, but when the module as an m4 directory libtool copies its macros there and they are used on system with v 1.5. So as long as the tarball is created with v2, you know it won't be linked using v1.5. Unless of course someone autoreconf the tarball with v1.5. > I've still had other problems with 2.x deciding to drop linker options > it didn't want me to use. And of course, hacking install.sh to never > install a .la file improves things a lot. AC_DISABLE_STATIC (called before AC_PROG_LIBTOOL) should do that, or calling ./configure with --disable-static. Sorry, I can only suggests trivial solutions.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ xorg-devel@lists.x.org: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel