Greetings.
As I've posted to the list before, we use libtool in some fairly large
software packages. Thanks for all the excellent work on libtool!
Some of the consumers of our software use the Portland Group compilers
(http://www.pgroup.com/). Libtool 1.5.x doesn't seem to recognize
these com
Hi Jeff,
* Jeff Squyres wrote on Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 03:00:22PM CET:
>
> Some of the consumers of our software use the Portland Group compilers
> (http://www.pgroup.com/). Libtool 1.5.x doesn't seem to recognize
> these compilers, and therefore doesn't always do the Right Things.
Libtool doe
On Nov 17, 2004, at 9:38 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Some of the consumers of our software use the Portland Group compilers
(http://www.pgroup.com/). Libtool 1.5.x doesn't seem to recognize
these compilers, and therefore doesn't always do the Right Things.
Libtool doesn't know about Portland's comp
On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 06:32:51PM -0800, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> curious also what's in ../utils/libopenhpiutils.la
>
> probably
>
> installed=yes
>
> and
>
> libdir='/home/sdague/openhpi/openhpi-1.9.3/_inst/lib'
>
> but
openhpi/openhpi-1.9.3/_build/utils/libopenhpiutils.la contains the
follo
On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 09:49:46PM -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> >
> >curious also what's in ../utils/libopenhpiutils.la
> >
> >probably
> >
> >installed=yes
> >
> >and
> >
> >libdir='/home/sdague/openhpi/openhpi-1.9.3/_inst/lib'
> >
> >but
> >
> >/home/
On Wed, 17 Nov 2004, Sean Dague wrote:
/home/sdague/openhpi/openhpi-1.9.3/_inst/lib/libopenhpiutils.so
doesn't yet exist?
If this is the case then this means that the lib_LTLIBRARIES
specification is ordered incorrectly in Makefile.am. Unfortunately,
Automake does not yet have a way to ensure that
* Sean Dague wrote on Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 06:07:55PM CET:
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 06:32:51PM -0800, Jacob Meuser wrote:
>
>
> > /home/sdague/openhpi/openhpi-1.9.3/_inst/lib/libopenhpiutils.so
> > doesn't yet exist?
>
> Nothing exists in _inst except directories, as this phase of make distchec
Actually, before I attempt the LT 2.x patch, how does this look for the
1.5 patch? I checked pgcc, pgCC, pgf77, and pgf90, both in the 1.5
test suite (I assuming that configuring LT with CC=pgcc [etc.] and then
"make check" is what is necessary?) and with a small sample automake
package that I
Dear Sir or Madam,
Would you REFINANCE if you knew you'd SAVE TH0USANDS?
We'll get you lnterest as low as 1.92%.
Don't believe me? Fill out our small online questionaire and we'll show you
how.
Get the house/home and/or car you always wanted, it only takes 10 seconds of
your time:
http://ww
On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 08:58:35AM +0100, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Jacob Meuser wrote on Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 01:07:20AM CET:
> > On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 11:00:34PM +, Scott James Remnant wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2004-11-16 at 11:15 -0800, Jacob Meuser wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2004 at 03:02
Libtool 1.5.10's ltdl.m4 includes the code:
AC_DEFINE_UNQUOTED(LTDL_SYSSEARCHPATH, "$sys_search_path",
[Define to the system default library search path.])
This causes the macro LTDL_SYSSEARCHPATH to hold the value of what was
originally sys_lib_dlsearch_path_spec in libtool.m4.
sys_lib_dls
11 matches
Mail list logo
