For IBM AIX 64-bit we need
AR="ar -X64" and
NM="nm -X64 -B"
assuming /usr/ccs/bin is first in the path.
(If you can detect you are building for AIX 64 then you can
check /usr/ccs/bin and use absolute path in assignment)
Roger
Rolf wrote :
I have seen very few uses where AR was actually set ma
On 2006-03-29, Brian Gough <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> checking for ar... false
> [...]
> false cru .libs/libutils.a .libs/placeholder.o
> make[2]: *** [libutils.la] Error 1
If AR defaulted to "$(MISSING) ar" if no ar was found (instead of false), then
no error is given if ar is not found b
Ralf Wildenhues writes:
> Erm. The user did not have /usr/ccs/bin in $PATH?
Right, /usr/ccs/bin was not in the PATH.
> Well yes, but sometimes ar is not needed, for example it /may/ not be
> needed when --disable-static is given.
Okay
> Naa. Kean Johnston already suggested adding /usr/ccs
Hi David,
* David Lee wrote on Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 11:36:59AM CEST:
>
> For some of our options, when end-user feature "XYZ" is nice but is not
> actually essential, we now have a local (developer) convention of:
>--enable-XYZ={yes|no|try}
[ nice explanation of default and soft failure ]
G
On Thu, 30 Mar 2006, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Tim Mooney wrote on Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 12:19:13AM CEST:
> [...]
> > The real question is, does libtool's configure macro know whether ar is
> > needed. You seem to be indicating that it never knows (in any case)
> > whether ar is needed. Am I unde
In regard to: Re: handling of missing AR, Ralf Wildenhues said (at 7:49am...:
If, however, we know that ar is going to be required but it's not found
at configure time, wouldn't it be better to have configure emit an error
message such as:
But how do you know the user will use
Hi Tim,
* Tim Mooney wrote on Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 12:19:13AM CEST:
> In regard to: Re: handling of missing AR, Ralf Wildenhues said (at
> 10:25pm...:
>
> >>Shouldn't libtool's portion of configure fail in that case?
> >
> >I'm not really in fav
In regard to: Re: handling of missing AR, Ralf Wildenhues said (at 10:25pm...:
Shouldn't libtool's portion of configure fail in that case?
I'm not really in favor of adding lots of failure points to macros.
Sure, there are some hideous cases (missing `file' on Cygwin is,
Hi Tim,
* Tim Mooney wrote on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 10:02:31PM CEST:
> In regard to: Re: handling of missing AR, Ralf Wildenhues said (at 9:33pm...:
> >* Brian Gough wrote on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 09:11:54PM CEST:
> >>
> >>I've had a libtool-related problem rep
In regard to: Re: handling of missing AR, Ralf Wildenhues said (at 9:33pm...:
Hi Brian,
* Brian Gough wrote on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 09:11:54PM CEST:
I've had a libtool-related problem reported with a test release of GNU
GSL on a Solaris system with gcc & Sun ld, but missing 'ar
Hi Brian,
* Brian Gough wrote on Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 09:11:54PM CEST:
>
> I've had a libtool-related problem reported with a test release of GNU
> GSL on a Solaris system with gcc & Sun ld, but missing 'ar'.
Erm. The user did not have /usr/ccs/bin in $PATH?
I've never heard about a Solaris whe
11 matches
Mail list logo
