On Wed, 2004-11-10 at 13:25 +0000, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: > Peter O'Gorman wrote: > > Well, I haven't thought about it really, I was vaguely imagining running > > a perl script during bootstrap which would take the bits and pieces and > > put them all together. I am told that xslt could do this too. The point > > being that we'd end up with the same (more or less) libtool.m4 as we > > have now, it would just be a heck of a lot easier to find the bits and > > pieces related to specific platforms, and would leave the platform > > independent stuff in a single file. > > Gah, perl? Blech. XML? Bah! Choke... > This does seem rather over-the-top to me ... the only thing worse I can think of would be using lisp for anything other than scaring comp-sci students with.
> I think that porting ltmain to C or a byte-compiled language of some sort > is definitely a win all round, so we can probably come up with an > implementation in whatever language ltmain gets rewritten in eventually. > The trouble is that you need to either compile ltmain on every platform, or have an interpreter handy. I guess there could be a magic Automake-shimmy to make every binary depend on "libtool", which can be compiled in-place in the source a bit like libintl. This scares me more than the shell script :p Scott -- Have you ever, ever felt like this? Had strange things happen? Are you going round the twist?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
