On Fri, 2001-10-05 at 02:21, Tim Van Holder wrote:
> On Fri, 2001-10-05 at 07:14, Ian Peters wrote:
> > Unfortunately, with libtool 1.4.x, I get this instead (after a much,
> > much longer time):
> >
> > gcc -g -O2 -Wall -Wunused -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -o
> > [snip]
> > insta
On Fri, 2001-10-05 at 02:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What's bad is their position has been reordered. What version of
> libtool are you using? I take it you want all libraries between
> -Bstatic and -Bdynamic statically linked?
Forgot to say, this has been tested with libtool 1.4 and 1.4.2.
-
On Fri, 2001-10-05 at 02:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 01:14:52AM -0400, Ian Peters wrote:
> > Conspicuously missing are the linker directives to be passed to gcc,
> > namely -Wl,-Bstatic and -Wl,-Bdynamic. I do this to produce a binary
> > that is linked statically excep
On Fri, 2001-10-05 at 07:14, Ian Peters wrote:
> Unfortunately, with libtool 1.4.x, I get this instead (after a much,
> much longer time):
>
> gcc -g -O2 -Wall -Wunused -Wmissing-prototypes -Wmissing-declarations -o
> [snip]
> installer-ui.o -Wl,-Bstatic -rdynamic -rdynamic -rdynamic -rdynamic
>
On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 01:14:52AM -0400, Ian Peters wrote:
> An application I work on has been calling libtool (through automake)
> with linker directives on the libtool line, around many of the libraries
> specified, like so (apologies if this wraps strangely, it's all one
> line):
>
> /bin/sh
An application I work on has been calling libtool (through automake)
with linker directives on the libtool line, around many of the libraries
specified, like so (apologies if this wraps strangely, it's all one
line):
/bin/sh ../libtool --mode=link gcc -g -O2 -Wall -Wunused
-Wmissing-prototypes -
I'm not sure what kind of list this is (I found the information at
www.gnu.org/directory/libtool.html), so I'm not currently subscribed.
Please either send me subscription information, or CC me on replies.
Thanks!
--
Ian Peters
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
This is a followup to my previous complaint that exceptions were not
working with CVS libtool, SPARC Solaris 2.6, and gcc 3.0.1. I suspect
that this may be due to a compiler bug.
I performed a trivial C++ exception test to see if exceptions were
working. I compiled the test by handl. The test w
Title: ¢À ½ÅÁö½ÄÀÎ ÃÊû °¿¬È¸ ¢À
¾È³çÇϼ¼¿ä. º»¸ÞÀÏÀº °¿¬È¸ È«º¸¸¦ À§ÇÏ¿© 1ȸ¼º ¸ÞÀÏÀÌ¸ç ¸ÞÀÏ È¨ÆäÀÌÁö¿Í °Ô½ÃÆÇ¿¡¼
¼öÁýµÈ°ÍÀÔ´Ï´Ù
¢À ½ÅÁö½ÄÀÎ ÃÊû
°¿¬È¸ ¢À
Á¤º¸È ½Ã´ë¿¡ ÁöÀû
È£±â½ÉÀÌ ¸¹Àº ´ç½Å !!½ÅÁö½ÄÀÎ ÃÊû
¹«·á °
Maybe this is a dumb question, but is it possible, by which I mean
portable, to put comments in the symbol file used with
-export-symbols?
___
Libtool mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
I think I've struck a bit of a problem trying the cvs libtool with
GMP. GMP has some object files with the same name, like mpz/random.lo
and mpn/random.lo. On vax-dec-ultrix4.5, libtool decides the command
line limit is 3073, and does the final libgmp library link in two
pieces. Unfortunately o
On Fri, 5 Oct 2001, Max Horn wrote:
[...]
>
> At 1:35 Uhr +0200 22.09.2001, Max Horn wrote:
> >1) with regard to dlpreopen, there is yet another quoting problem.
> >The libtool file generated from HEAD-cvs contains three lines like
> >this:
> >
> >global_symbol_to_c_name_address="sed -n -e 's/^
At 17:39 Uhr -0500 04.10.2001, scott hutinger wrote:
>On Fri, 5 Oct 2001, Max Horn wrote:
>
>> >Ok, cdemo tests fail. What are the requirements from admin for
>> >modification to cdemo if needed? Sorry I have to ask, sometimes people
>> >have various reasons for not allowing specific modifica
On Fri, 5 Oct 2001, Max Horn wrote:
> >Ok, cdemo tests fail. What are the requirements from admin for
> >modification to cdemo if needed? Sorry I have to ask, sometimes people
> >have various reasons for not allowing specific modifications.
>
> The problem is not in cdemo, this is a test, and
>Ok, cdemo tests fail. What are the requirements from admin for
>modification to cdemo if needed? Sorry I have to ask, sometimes people
>have various reasons for not allowing specific modifications.
The problem is not in cdemo, this is a test, and it fails for valid
reasons on Darwin - namely,
On Thu, 4 Oct 2001, Max Horn wrote:
> > > The reason is,
> >>
> >> [drawin1.[0-2]]] is a bit behind, since Darwin is at 1.4.1 as of October
> >> 1st. Although < 1.4.0 is a major change in some instances, although not
> >> so much with libtool.
>
> There is a good reason for this check - it
> > The reason is,
>>
>> [drawin1.[0-2]]] is a bit behind, since Darwin is at 1.4.1 as of October
>> 1st. Although < 1.4.0 is a major change in some instances, although not
>> so much with libtool.
There is a good reason for this check - it *deliberatly* checks for
darwin 1.0 - 1.2, because
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> If you replace the delimiter with a character other than "/", does the
> sed command work?
Yes, colons worked in last nights build.
--- libtool.m4.old Thu Oct 4 01:40:53 2001
+++ libtool.m4 Thu Oct 4 01:42:27 2001
@@ -1446,7 +1446,7 @@
for tagname in $tagnam
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 05:08:31PM -0500, scott hutinger wrote:
> I thought you might be able to help me with this question.
>
> Currently Apple/Darwin keeps some libtool files in their
> /usr/share/libtool that under a build of berkeleydb for OpenOffice, I copy
> those files to the berkelydb bef
On Tue, Sep 11, 2001 at 05:06:51AM +0100, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
: I am pleased to announce the release of GNU Libtool 1.4.2, which now
I haven't investigated this problem that thorough, but on a
"powerpc-apple-darwin1.3.7" system (an iBook) I had to change the
$archive_cmds variable (in libtool.
On Thu, Oct 04, 2001 at 09:06:35AM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Oct 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Has anyone else seen this problem? Is it due to libtool?
> >
> > Have you tried generating a small test program with exceptions to
> > determine if GCC is the culprit? I cannot im
On Thu, 4 Oct 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Has anyone else seen this problem? Is it due to libtool?
>
> Have you tried generating a small test program with exceptions to
> determine if GCC is the culprit? I cannot imagine anything inherent in
> libtool that would cause a problem. Are both v
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 09:27:41PM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> ImageMagick has been using CVS libtool. With gcc 2.95.2, C++
> exceptions work fine under Solaris 2.6. With gcc 3.0.1, C++
> exceptions are not being caught, causing the program to core dump.
>
> Has anyone else seen this proble
23 matches
Mail list logo
