Re: Library collision

2007-02-14 Thread Bob Friesenhahn
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Jeff Safier wrote: I have two libraries (from an existing Windows app) that have been converted to LINUX static libraries It seems that each library calls a function from the other library. I noticed that the library order in my Makefile.am needs to be order dependent, mean

Re: HPUX: PARALLEL=4 make -P

2007-02-14 Thread deckrider
On 2/14/07, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: In other words, this parallel make looks buggy and unusable to me, and there is really nothing Automake can do about it. Am I missing anything? Not that I can tell. Thank you for your efforts in simplifying the problem so that it is plain

Re: HPUX: PARALLEL=4 make -P

2007-02-14 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Oh, boy. The simple summary is: for parallel builds, use GNU make, avoid HP-UX make. Here's a longer one: I have been able to reproduce the issue on the HP testdrive host "HP-UX 11i v2 on Integrity rx1620", which is a two-way system. Here's a reduced self-contained example: tr T \\t >Makefile <

Re: Library collision

2007-02-14 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hello Jeff, * Jeff Safier wrote on Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 05:16:55PM CET: > I have two libraries (from an existing Windows app) that have been > converted to LINUX static libraries > It seems that each library calls a function from the other library. Which is unclean design, but oh well. > I not

Library collision

2007-02-14 Thread Jeff Safier
I have two libraries (from an existing Windows app) that have been converted to LINUX static libraries It seems that each library calls a function from the other library. I noticed that the library order in my Makefile.am needs to be order dependent, meaning if a library calls another librarie

Re: prog_DEPENDENCIES

2007-02-14 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
* Bob Rossi wrote on Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 04:48:35PM CET: > On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 04:40:03PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > * Bob Rossi wrote on Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 04:19:20PM CET: > > > > > > One other question. This is in regards to libraries depending on > > > libraries. If library B depe

Re: prog_DEPENDENCIES

2007-02-14 Thread Bob Rossi
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 04:40:03PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Hi Bob, > > * Bob Rossi wrote on Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 04:19:20PM CET: > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 07:52:02PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > > BTW, all the _DEPENDENCIES that I'm talking about are > > > > libraries that are bui

Re: prog_DEPENDENCIES

2007-02-14 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hi Bob, * Bob Rossi wrote on Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 04:19:20PM CET: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 07:52:02PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > BTW, all the _DEPENDENCIES that I'm talking about are > > > libraries that are built from my own project, but not necessarily in the > > > same Makefile. > >

Re: prog_DEPENDENCIES

2007-02-14 Thread Bob Rossi
On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 07:52:02PM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > BTW, all the _DEPENDENCIES that I'm talking about are > > libraries that are built from my own project, but not necessarily in the > > same Makefile. > > OK. You will have to make sure these libraries exist and are up to > date,

LIBTOOLFLAGS missing in install-%DIR%LTLIBRARIES and uninstall-%DIR%LTLIBRARIES targets

2007-02-14 Thread Francesco Salvestrini
Hi, I tried to pass the --silent flag to libtool via AM_LIBTOOLFLAGS, LIBTOOLFLAGS and LIBRARY_LIBTOOLFLAGS but my flags don't get passed to libtool in the install and uninstall targets. At the first instance I've (apparently) solved my problem by placing the following substitution in configure.a