Re: [patch 04/19] 286-gary-libtoolize-recursive-ltdl.diff Queue

Hi Gary, * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 06:40:59PM CEST: > Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > >Do you want the (non)recursive/subproject info as argument to > > LT_WITH_LTDL > >or > > LT_CONFIG_LTDL_DIR > > Eek! That leaked in from the ancient past. My first implementation tried > to p

Re: [patch 04/19] 286-gary-libtoolize-recursive-ltdl.diff Queue

Tweaked this patch slightly to allow for the next one to work whether or not SUBDIR_LIBOBJS are supported by the user's autotools. Okay to commit? Another step towards fixing LT_WITH_LTDL. Here we add an optional mode argument to libtoolize so that the user can tell libtoolize whether she is go

Re: [patch 04/19] 286-gary-libtoolize-recursive-ltdl.diff Queue

Hallo Ralf, Thanks for the review! Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Very nice patch! But it mixes up two things, and at that quite heavily: Do you want the (non)recursive/subproject info as argument to LT_WITH_LTDL or LT_CONFIG_LTDL_DIR or possibly both? Please redo `libtoolize' output based on the

Re: [patch 04/19] 286-gary-libtoolize-recursive-ltdl.diff Queue

Hi Gary, * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 12:26:28PM CEST: > Another step towards fixing LT_WITH_LTDL. Here we add an optional mode > argument to libtoolize so that the user can tell libtoolize whether she > is going to subconfigure libltdl as always, or use either a non-recursive

[patch 04/19] 286-gary-libtoolize-recursive-ltdl.diff Queue

Another step towards fixing LT_WITH_LTDL. Here we add an optional mode argument to libtoolize so that the user can tell libtoolize whether she is going to subconfigure libltdl as always, or use either a non-recursive automake (like libtool itself), or a recursive automake with a top-level configur