On Fri, Oct 08, 2004 at 07:07:41AM -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Bob Friesenhahn writes:
>
> >So I was forced to read through a long (and well written) email before
> >the crux of the matter appeared. If make should not be running these
> >targets in parallel then this smells like an Automake problem to me.
>
> No, from automake's perspective there are no dependencies between these
> targets. One target copies some libraries to the install directory. The
> other target copies some binaries to their install directory:
>
> install library.so %{_libdir}
>
> and
>
> install binary %{_bindir}
>
> It is a libtool-introduced dependency that now requires the library to be
> installed before the binary.
>
> This dependency does not exist when libtool is not used.
Incorrect. Installing a library which a binary must be linked against
this way is fundamentally non-portable. For example, on HP-UX, the
embedded runtime path will be the path to the library from the build
directory, not the installed library directory. So, regardless of
whether or not libtool is used, order matters.
--
albert chin ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
_______________________________________________
Libtool mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
