Re: RFC: proposal for indirect deplibs

On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 10:19 +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Libtool and inter-library dependencies > == > > needed-following linker: > A system with a needed-following linker has a means to record > dependencies on other libraries within a library (based on the

Fraud Prevention Measures

Dear [EMAIL PROTECTED], We recently have determined that different computers have logged onto your Online Banking account, and multiple password failures were present before the logons. We now need you to re-confirm your account information to us. If this is not completed by November 7, 20

Re: RFC: proposal for indirect deplibs

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004, Joe Orton wrote: On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 10:14:35PM -0800, Noah Misch wrote: For safety, libtool would assume that unadorned dependent libraries contribute to the API. An option, say `-private-libs', would mark the start of normal dependencies. For example, the link command f

Re: RFC: proposal for indirect deplibs

On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 10:14:35PM -0800, Noah Misch wrote: > For safety, libtool would assume that unadorned dependent libraries contribute > to the API. An option, say `-private-libs', would mark the start of normal > dependencies. For example, the link command for libbar might look like this:

Re: Relocatable libraries with libtool--can I do it?

%% Noah Misch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: nm> Several individuals have communicated similar requirements here. nm> Some had partial workarounds you may find useful; check the nm> archives. OK, I'll see what I can find. nm> Roughly. The .la does not need to encode the $ROOT, but libtool

Re: Relocatable libraries with libtool--can I do it?

%% Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: rw> Only one question for now (I don't know enough about the problem space rw> yet), concerning notation: rw> _Relocatable_ IMHO is a package which can be installed (literally rw> copied to) in /usr or /usr/local without any difference. rw

Re: cvs commit messages

Peter O'Gorman wrote: > Gary V. Vaughan wrote: >> Peter O'Gorman wrote: >> >>> I again managed to make a commit and forgot to do it properly (so no >>> mail was sent to libtool-commits), so I filed a support request to get >>> commit mails handled automatically again: >>>

Re: Relocatable libraries with libtool--can I do it?

* Paul Smith wrote on Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 01:18:48AM CET: > Hi all. I'm having a severe problem with libtool-ized packages, of > which there are more and more these days, in my environment. I'm > wondering if anyone here can suggest how I should proceed; whether > there's something in libtool th

Re: cvs commit messages

Gary V. Vaughan wrote: Hi Peter, Peter O'Gorman wrote: I again managed to make a commit and forgot to do it properly (so no mail was sent to libtool-commits), so I filed a support request to get commit mails handled automatically again:

Improve vision

When a prominent doctor endorses a supplement based on rigorous clinical testing, it pays to find out what that supplement is and how you can apply it to your own life. When many doctors endorse it, it's time to take serious notice. Visit here to increase your quality of life http://r.4.universalp

Re: libtoolize: `configure.ac' does not exist

>>> "Ross" == Ross Boylan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Ross> $ libtoolize -n Ross> libtoolize: `configure.ac' does not exist Ross> Try `libtoolize --help' for more information. Ross> $ libtoolize --version Ross> libtoolize (GNU libtool) 1.5.6 Ross> I am trying to use libtool/libtoolize in a

Re: Relocatable libraries with libtool--can I do it?

On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 07:18:48PM -0500, Paul Smith wrote: > My environment involves running in an x86 host running Linux, and > cross-compiling everything for a different target. A few extra things > about this are (a) that we do not use chroot or any similar technology, > and (b) the entire thi