Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
Yes, good point. How about `LT_SYS_MODULEEXT'?
With an LT_SYS_SHLIBEXT, we could factor away the `shrext_cmds' nonsense.
The darwin code in ltmain.sh hardcodes dylib a fair amount at the moment,
so we could clean that up to.
Sure, if you want to make an LT_SYS_SHLIBEXT too i
Hi Peter,
Thanks for the feedback.
Peter O'Gorman wrote:
> Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
>
>> ## LT_SYS_SHLIBEXT
>
> Since this is actually the "module" extension, I am not sure that it
> should be called LT_SYS_SHLIBEXT. Although it is only Mac OS X/darwin
> that these differ in current code, perha
