Re: [lmi] Upgrading libxml2 and libxslt

[Vadim Zeitlin]

On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 15:15:15 +0000 Greg Chicares <address@hidden> wrote:

GC> The whole point of libtool is to make this sort of thing work easily.

 I wish I could convince libtool developers of this...

GC> >  And if we really need to use libxml2 as a DLL, I see only two options:
GC> > 
GC> > 1. Get and build zlib DLL ourselves too.
GC> > 2. Use a custom makefile for libxml2 and link in (static) zlib into it.
GC> > 
GC> >  Neither is very appealing but I think (1) is better. Unless we're ready 
to
GC> > live with a patch to libtool.
GC> 
GC> How about:
GC> 
GC> 3. Download an official build, and verify its md5sum

 I still prefer (1), but I agree that (3) should work too. The problem with
it is that of consistency: if we use zlib binary, why not use one for
libxml2 too? It's also a C library (i.e. doesn't suffer from C++ ABI
problems), so why build one from sources and not the other? I'd prefer to
build everything and could live with using binaries for everything, but
mixing the two seems strange.

 Regards,
VZ