Hallo!
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Alexandre Duret-Lutz writes:
>
> "Gary" == Gary V Vaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> because AM_PROG_CC_C_O horribly
>> overwrites CC, it's not clear to me whether
>>
>> AM_PROG_CC_C_O
>> LT_INIT
>>
>> is equivalent to
>>
>> LT_INIT
>> AM_PROG_CC_C_O
>>
>>
Salut Alexandre!
Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
"Gary" == Gary V Vaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Gary> My feeling at the moment is that it would be a small price to pay for
> Gary> simplifying the interface to automake (i.e. _not_ being sometimes told,
> Gary> partway through the auto
Alexandre Duret-Lutz writes:
"Gary" == Gary V Vaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Gary> But for a project built with `make -j', we still need AM_PROG_CC_C_O
Gary> and _LT_COMPILER_C_O to understand each others' locks :-(
Seems so. I thought it was not needed because when
AM_PROG_CC_C_O decid
>>> "Gary" == Gary V Vaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
Gary> I'm not saying that the compile script should be used,
Gary> just that the tests to determine whether it might be
Gary> needed are run as a matter of course. Looking at the
Gary> implementation of AM_PROG_CC_C_O, I see that
>>> "Gary" == Gary V Vaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Gary> But for a project built with `make -j', we still need AM_PROG_CC_C_O
Gary> and _LT_COMPILER_C_O to understand each others' locks :-(
Seems so. I thought it was not needed because when
AM_PROG_CC_C_O decides `compile' is required, i
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
If the compile script is unnecessarily used, then compilation will be
even slower. This seems particularly true for the Windows operating
system where compilation using libtool already feels like compiling in
molasses. It seems that Windows is very slow
Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Sep 2004, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
>
>>
>> Okay. But for a project built with `make -j', we still need
>> AM_PROG_CC_C_O
>> and _LT_COMPILER_C_O to understand each others' locks :-(
>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> Gary> Meant to ask, why doesn't AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE (condition
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
Okay. But for a project built with `make -j', we still need AM_PROG_CC_C_O
and _LT_COMPILER_C_O to understand each others' locks :-(
[...]
Gary> Meant to ask, why doesn't AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE (conditionally if
Gary> necessary) simply invoke AM_PROG_CC_C_O?
Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
"Gary" == Gary V Vaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> Gary> So does that simply mean that libtool objects can be correctly built
> Gary> as subdir-objects without AM_PROG_CC_C_O? Sorry to bug you, just
> Gary> making sure I understand why you made
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Salut!
On 7 Sep 2004, at 22:03, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
"Gary" == Gary V Vaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Gary> Do we need to patch automake to accept LT_INIT for
Gary> subdir-objects projects, or do you think AC_PROG_CC_C_O
Gary> should be me
>>> "Gary" == Gary V Vaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
Gary> So does that simply mean that libtool objects can be correctly built
Gary> as subdir-objects without AM_PROG_CC_C_O? Sorry to bug you, just
Gary> making sure I understand why you made the patch the way you did...
The purpos
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Salut Alexandre!
Welcome back. Hope you enjoyed your vacation :-)
On 7 Sep 2004, at 22:03, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
"Gary" == Gary V Vaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 08:29:07PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote:
I just tri
>>> "Gary" == Gary V Vaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
>>> On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 08:29:07PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote:
>>>
I just tried to build cvs libtool with cvs auto* all from today, and get:
make all-recursive
Making all in .
>>> cd . && /bin/ksh /us
Hi Alexandre!
Your automake patch of 2004-08-04 causes this to happen:
Noah Misch wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 07:51:01PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote:
>
>>On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 08:29:07PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote:
>>
>>>I just tried to build cvs libtool with cvs auto* all from today, an
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 07:51:01PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 08:29:07PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote:
> > I just tried to build cvs libtool with cvs auto* all from today, and get:
> >
> > make all-recursive
> > Making all in .
> > cd . && /bin/ksh /usr/src/local/libto
On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 08:29:07PM +0100, Patrick Welche wrote:
> I just tried to build cvs libtool with cvs auto* all from today, and get:
>
> make all-recursive
> Making all in .
> cd . && /bin/ksh /usr/src/local/libtool/config/missing --run automake-1.9a --gnits
> libltdl/Makefile.am: C obje
I just tried to build cvs libtool with cvs auto* all from today, and get:
make all-recursive
Making all in .
cd . && /bin/ksh /usr/src/local/libtool/config/missing --run automake-1.9a --gnits
libltdl/Makefile.am: C objects with per-target flags but `AM_PROG_CC_C_O' not in
`configure.ac'
Am I
On Jul 22, 2000, "Dennis [A Sys-Adm]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> configure: error: installation or configuration problem: C compiler cannot
> create executables.
% echo 'main(){}' > test.c
% gcc test.c
Before this works, you'll have trouble installing almost *any* piece
of software.
--
Ale
Hello support,
I have solaris 2.6 [sparc] platform. While installing libtool 1.3.2 i am
getting below compliation error. Please kindly give solution for this
problem.
loading cache ./config.cache
checking for a BSD compatible install... ./install-sh -c
checking whether build environment is san
19 matches
Mail list logo
