[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Shared without libtool

From: NightStrike
Subject: Re: Shared without libtool
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 20:05:11 -0500

On 3/7/08, Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Sat, March 8, 2008 01:33, NightStrike wrote:
> > On 3/7/08, Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> On Sat, March 8, 2008 01:23, NightStrike wrote:
> >> >> > Does automake support building shared libraries without using
> >> >> >libtool?
> >> > How would one go about doing it?  in a nutshell..
> >>
> >> Oh, I forgot, sorry: there is a special impediment, namely that I won't
> >> help people to do it.  No reason making myself more work needlessly.
> >
> > That's rather harsh... no need to be mean about it.  I was asking at a
> > very high level, not asking for step by step instructions.
> Hey, I didn't intend to be mean about it at all.  I don't mind if people

Ok, forgotten :)

> recommend non-autotools solutions on this list (as long as they don't put
> autotools down unreasonably).  All I'm saying is that I don't go out of
> my way and think about these issues, too.  If you have a special problem
> and can describe it, I may well look into it.  But not doing so for any
> reason is not harsh.  It's just my choice.  Maybe someone else helps you
> (or maybe someone else writes such an obviously wrong answer that I will
> feel obliged to correct ;-).

I can understand that.

> At a very high level: files are pretty much just Makefiles
> with extra syntactic sugar.  So you can write plain make rules.  Do
> whatever you did with make before you used Automake.

That sounds reasonable.  Thanks!

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]