Roberto Bagnara wrote:
Hi there,
I have a project that builds several libraries. For most of them,
both the shared and static versions make sense, so I don't want
to use AC_DISABLE_STATIC. However, for some of them the static
version does not make any sense. How can I avoid the overhead
of b
Jason Curl wrote:
Roberto Bagnara wrote:
Hi there,
I have a project that builds several libraries. For most of them,
both the shared and static versions make sense, so I don't want
to use AC_DISABLE_STATIC. However, for some of them the static
version does not make any sense. How can I avoi
Hello Roberto,
* Roberto Bagnara wrote on Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 09:40:25PM CET:
>
> I have a project that builds several libraries. For most of them,
> both the shared and static versions make sense, so I don't want
> to use AC_DISABLE_STATIC. However, for some of them the static
> version does n
Hi,
Sorry if i am posting this in the wrong mailing list, but i cannot really
track the problem.
I am trying to build gmp-4.2.2 using a different dynamic loader.
The gmp package uses a ltmain.sh script to generate the libtool script.
What I need is gmp libs linked against /toolchain/ld-linux-x86
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Roberto Bagnara wrote on Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 09:40:25PM CET:
I have a project that builds several libraries. For most of them,
both the shared and static versions make sense, so I don't want
to use AC_DISABLE_STATIC. However, for some of them the static
version does n
Add an option, --no-la-files, which skips installing the .la files. When
used with --mode=uninstall, libtool tries to use the .lai file from the
build directory.
Signed-off-by: Dan Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Does this seem reasonable? I've checked that this doesn't break
uninstall or dist
