Re: normal ltdl linking suggestions?

[Gary V. Vaughan]

Hallo Andreas,

On Jul 9, 2007, at 4:49 AM, Andreas Jellinghaus wrote:
> the libtool info document has several suggestions how to link with  
> libltdl.
> but they all imply to include the ltdl source in my projects  
> source, and I
> don't want to do that. Also with most distributions shipping ltdl as a
> normal library with devel and runtime package, I see no reason for  
> that,
> and would like to use libltdl simply like any other library.

All the world is not Linux.  By not shipping libltdl at all, you're  
making
life difficult for the users of hundreds of other platforms who will  
have to
install their own libltdl just to build your package, which many will  
likely
decide is too much effort.

Compared to the megabyte or two of generated shell scripts and configure
support files you're probably already shipping, shipping the libltdl  
sources
too is not much of an overhead.

> are there any suggestions how I should do that?

In the HEAD snapshots, the following is supposed to work:

  LT_WITH_LTDL([libltdl])

This still requires that you have a copy of libltdl in your package  
(in the
subdirectory named by the argument), but allows the user to  
dynamically link
against an installed libltdl if they prefer by calling:

  ./configure --without-included-ltdl

I say "supposed" because that part of the tree is currently in flux  
as we
work towards an alpha release from HEAD in the coming months.

Cheers,
        Gary
--
  ())_.              Email me: address@hidden
  ( '/           Read my blog: http://blog.azazil.net
  / )=         ...and my book: http://sources.redhat.com/autobook
`(_~)_      Join my AGLOCO Network: http://www.agloco.com/r/BBBS7912

PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part