On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 12:30:17AM -0600, Robert Boehne wrote:
> Wesley,
>
> IMHO, Libtool is better off if you change your clean rule to:
>
> clean:
> (cd main && libtool --mode=clean rm -f test test.o)
> (cd lib2 && libtool --mode=clean rm -f libb.la b.lo)
> (cd lib1 && libtool --mode=clean rm -f liba.la a.lo)
I am aware of this workaround. It is what I do now.
However, with this rule cleaning is prohibitively slow.
Example cleaning with my (small) project:
with patch =
real 0m1.275s
user 0m0.680s
sys 0m0.580s
with above workaround =
real 0m9.368s
user 0m7.280s
sys 0m1.630s
Notice that the user time has been nicreased by a factor of 14*!
Not to mention, the intent of libtool --mode=clean seemed to be that it be a
drop in replacement for 'rm' when used with libraries. Requiring changing
directory into the library dir and only removing one file certainly violates
that.
Furthermore, libtool can output libraries in subdirectories, but cannot
clean libraries in subdirectories. This assymetry seems to indicative of not
well-defined functional goals.
Please see my Mar 2/3 message where I included a patch. The original code
was clearly intended to support what I was doing and the problem is a bug.
If the author had not intended for this to work, he would not have code
testing the directory in there.
---
Wes
_______________________________________________
Libtool mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
