Re: Building .so files only.

On Sun, 2003-08-31 at 16:22, Tom Howard wrote: > > I'm not an expert so make sure you have a look at the other responses. > > They way I handles this in my project was to install the modules into the > > pkglibdir and then had a post installation hook that would create a > > symbolic link within t

Re: Building .so files only.

On Wednesday 27 August 2003 16:48, Tom Howard wrote: > On Wednesday 27 August 2003 16:21, Stephen Torri wrote: > > I am trying to build libraries that will act as modules in a program. At > > present when I do a compile its building .la, .so, .so.0.0 and .so.0.0.0 > > files. I am looking for advice

Re: Building .so files only.

On Fri, 2003-08-29 at 06:55, Benjamin Reed wrote: > On Aug 29, 2003, at 12:55 AM, Daniel Reed wrote: > > > To produce only .la and .so files, you can pass -module -avoid-version > > to > > libtool. In Automake, you can do this by using something similar to: > > > > pkglib_LTLIBRARIES = mymod.la >

RE: Building .so files only.

Tom Howard writes: > That's my point. My understanding of Stephen problem is that he doesn't want > to build/install the companion files. [...] > So in his situation, patching libtool and using -shared isn't really going to > solve his problem. Correct? As already pointed out by Daniel Reed, -a

Re: Building .so files only.

On Aug 29, 2003, at 12:55 AM, Daniel Reed wrote: To produce only .la and .so files, you can pass -module -avoid-version to libtool. In Automake, you can do this by using something similar to: pkglib_LTLIBRARIES = mymod.la mymod_la_SOURCES = mymod.c mymod_la_LDFLAGS = -module -avoid-version This

Re: Building .so files only.

Why don't you provide an install_hook and copy only the .so file to your module directory? On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 12:18, Tom Howard wrote: > On Wednesday 27 August 2003 16:21, Stephen Torri wrote: > > I am trying to build libraries that will act as modules in a program. At > > present when I do a c

Re: Building .so files only.

Hi Ralph, On Friday 29 August 2003 16:53, Schleicher Ralph (LLI) wrote: > In libtool jargon, ".so file" is a synonym for a shared library. > This includes all companion files, but their names and number > depend on libtool's configuration and build options. E.g., HP-UX > uses .sl instead of .so f

RE: Building .so files only.

Tom Howard writes: > Sorry if I'm being dense, but (after reading the referenced messages) I don't > understand why using the -shared flag will only produce the a .so file. > Won't it still produce a .so.X, .so.X.X.X and .la files as well? In libtool jargon, ".so file" is a synonym for a shared l

Re: Building .so files only.

On 2003-08-29T14:14+1000, Tom Howard wrote: ) On Thursday 28 August 2003 16:08, Schleicher Ralph (LLI) wrote: ) > > So by patching my libtool I should be able to put the -shared flag in my ) > > AM_LDFLAGS for the Makefile.am and only get the shared.so file right? ) > Yes, but it makes sense adding

Re: Building .so files only.

Hi, On Thursday 28 August 2003 16:08, Schleicher Ralph (LLI) wrote: > > So by patching my libtool I should be able to put the -shared flag in my > > AM_LDFLAGS for the Makefile.am and only get the shared.so file right? > > Yes, but it makes sense adding it to CFLAGS, too. Sorry if I'm being dense

RE: Building .so files only.

Stephen Torri writes: > So by patching my libtool I should be able to put the -shared flag in my > AM_LDFLAGS for the Makefile.am and only get the shared.so file right? Yes, but it makes sense adding it to CFLAGS, too. > ! If the @samp{-static} option is given, then only a @samp{.o} file is > !

Re: Building .so files only.

On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 00:49, Stephen Torri wrote: > On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 01:50, Schleicher Ralph (LLI) wrote: > > > ! If the @samp{-static} option is given, then only a @samp{.o} file is > ! built, even if libtool was configured with @samp{--disable-static}. > > This sounds logically confusing.

Re: Building .so files only.

On Wed, 2003-08-27 at 01:50, Schleicher Ralph (LLI) wrote: > See , > for more details. So by patching my libtool I should be able to put the -shared flag in my AM_LDFLAGS for the Makefile.am and only get the shared.so file right? I se

Re: Building .so files only.

See , for more details. -- Ralph

Re: Building .so files only.

On Wednesday 27 August 2003 16:21, Stephen Torri wrote: > I am trying to build libraries that will act as modules in a program. At > present when I do a compile its building .la, .so, .so.0.0 and .so.0.0.0 > files. I am looking for advice on how to setup my Makefile.am file so > that all I get inst