[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#19245: Compile warnings after updating to 2.4.4
From: |
Gary V. Vaughan |
Subject: |
bug#19245: Compile warnings after updating to 2.4.4 |
Date: |
Thu, 4 Dec 2014 15:00:07 +0000 |
> On Dec 4, 2014, at 2:53 PM, Michael Wobst <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> Hey Gary (with one 'r') ;-)
>
> I'm glad we finally figured it out. Thanks!
>
> Greets,
> Michael
>
> Gary V. Vaughan schrieb:
>> [[put bug-libtool and debbugs back in Cc:]]
>>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>>> On Dec 4, 2014, at 1:45 PM, Michael Wobst <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Garry,
>>
>> (Just the one 'r' in my name, please! :-)
>>
>>> well, it's not just a cosmetical change from what I can see in 2.4.4's
>>> libltdl/Makefile.am when compared to 2.4.3's libltdl/Makefile.am
>>>
>>> I did a diff -urN to show you what I'm talking about:
>>>
>>> #####################################################################
>>> --- trunk_2.4.3/libltdl/Makefile.am 2014-12-04 14:11:47.887496698 +0100
>>> +++ trunk_2.4.4/libltdl/Makefile.am 2014-12-04 14:11:09.087091542 +0100
>>> @@ -45,8 +45,9 @@
>>> # -I$(srcdir) is needed for user that built libltdl with a sub-Automake
>>> # (not as a sub-package!) using 'nostdinc':
>>> AM_CPPFLAGS += -DLT_CONFIG_H='<$(LT_CONFIG_H)>' \
>>> - -DLTDL -I. -I$(srcdir) -Ilibltdl \
>>> - -I$(srcdir)/libltdl -I$(srcdir)/libltdl
>>> + -DLTDL -I. -I$(srcdir) \
>>> + -Ilibltdl -I$(srcdir)/libltdl \
>>> + -Ilibltdl -I$(srcdir)/libltdl/libltdl
>>>
>>> #####################################################################
>>>
>>> Note the last line with the path being '$(srcdir)/libltdl/libltdl'.
>>> This doesn't appear in previous versions of libtool, but in 2.4.4
>>
>> Ahah! Agreed, and fixed in master (I'll push as soon as the testsuite
>> finishes); thanks for persevering with me. While the change to ltdl.mk was
>> indeed cosmetic, I didn't account for the fact that during generation of
>> libltdl/Makefile.am multiple libltdl/libltdl on a single line of the source
>> file breaks the edit process.
>>
>> Thanks again for your help in tracking down and fixing that bug.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>