This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps@cygwin.com mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: libtool devel package still dll crippled.


Robert Collins wrote:


> What Ralfs patch does is change
> allow_undefined_flag to no (as opposed to unsupported) and


??  what's the difference between "...=unsupported" and "...=no" and 
"...="?  Shouldn't the SAME answer be given in all sections, with 
respect to whether "allow_undefined_flag" is a legal option?

Granted, you can't build a DLL -- in any language -- if there are 
undefined symbols.  But if I want to use libtool to build a static lib, 
I should be allowed to have undefined symbols.  Fine -- by default 
cygwin-libtool asserts -no-undefined, so I need to override that.  SO, 
allow_undefined_flag needs to be "yes" or "supported" or "...=", right?

I don't understand how merely allowing a user to supply a flag hurts 
Ralf's KDE build -- unless he is (mistakenly) USING that flag (even 
though he shouldn't when building a DLL).

And I REALLY don't want to disallow people from building static libs 
with undefined symbols using cygwin libtool.


> always_export_symbols to no (as opposed to yes).
> 
> Now I'm not entirely sure what always_export_symbols does...

> 
> Anyway, the reason there are multiple locations is that libtools guts
> are horrendous. There are folk putting time into factoring libtool to be
> a little bit more consistent and efficient though...
> 
> The location I refer to us in  AC_LIBTOOL_PROG_LD_SHLIBS, where as Ralf
> altered AC_LIBTOOL_LANG_CXX_CONFIG (which needed the alteration too - it
> effectively includes a copy of AC_LIBTOOL_PROG_LD_SHLIBS).


Okay, my patch conflicts with his.  Original CVS (20020316) (ignoring 
the always_export_symbols thing):

_LT_AC_TAGVAR(allow_undefined_flag, $1)=unsupported

My patch:

_LT_AC_TAGVAR(allow_undefined_flag, $1)=

Ralf's patch

_LT_AC_TAGVAR(allow_undefined_flag, $1)=no

Again, the "...=" came from you, Rob.  So, what's the difference between 
"...=" and "...=no" or "...=unsupported" (or "...=yes", for that 
matter).  And which do we want/need?

--Chuck


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]