Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: |> On Feb 4, 2002, "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: |> |> > On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 09:52:04AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: |> >> On Feb 4, 2002, "H . J . Lu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: |> >> |> >> > * libtool.m4 (lt_cv_deplibs_check_method): Support Linux/mips. |> >> |> >> Before I waste any further time on it, is it any different from the |> >> patch I rejected some months ago? It seems to still have the same |> >> problem. |> |> > I don't remember why you rejected it. |> |> The reason was that your patch enabled dependency tracking control |> that is unnecessary for most GNU/Linux systems. It was only necessary |> for old ARM systems whose glibc was broken.
Then why wasn't this done explicitly in the first place? Why is there an incomplete test for architectures != arm when it is much more robust to make a single check for arm? Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, [EMAIL PROTECTED] SuSE GmbH, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 Nürnberg Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different." _______________________________________________ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
