On Saturday, May 31, 2003, at 11:54 PM, Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
Peter O'Gorman wrote:
Because of the way things are set up, adding fsf gcc support is
essentially adding a completely different compiler. Depending on my
available free time, I may decide to revisit this issue, do you
really think it is required?
With stock GCC 3.3, most if not all of the Apple-like command line
options are processed just as they are on the compiler distributed by
Apple. Take a look at the sources and you'll see there are hooks for
this. For libtool 1.5, treating stock GCC 3.3 like Apple's GCC works
for me to generate dynamic libraries and executables.
I just did have a quick peek at the sources, looks like you are indeed
correct. I will submit a patch to the list tomorrow. To excuse myself
here, almost none of these flags were passed through by the gcc-3.2 fsf
gcc which was available when I first looked at this issue.
Thanks,
Peter
___
Libtool mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
