[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: patch for building fat libraries on darwin

From: Gary V. Vaughan
Subject: Re: patch for building fat libraries on darwin
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2004 16:08:53 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20030925 Thunderbird/0.3

Hash: SHA1

Peter O'Gorman wrote:
| Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
| | No, it's me :-)  Please forgive my shallow understanding of fat
| | libraries...
| Well, the lovely thing about this patch is that the number of people who
| would benifit from it (not counting Apple Computer) could probably be
| counted on the fingers of one hand :)

You just talked me out of okaying the patch! :-(

| The only solution I could come up with that didn't look like copying, and
| allowed libtool to pass all it's tests was to have 2 copies of the lib.

Okay, I understand your rationale for 2 libs now, so I'm fine with that.  I
don't want anymore arch specific (especially in this narrow case) shell code
to leak into  Post-1.6 I plan to work on factoring the stuff that
already leaked back into libtool.m4 -- we know what $host is at configure
time, so making everyone pay for $host checks for various other archs at
runtime is unnecessary.

If you can generalise your patch to move arch specific checks into libtool.m4,
and remove the corresponding code from then I'm happy for you to
apply in principle.  Unfortunately, I don't see an easy way to tweak the
contents of TAGVARS to achieve this, so you'll likely need to create new
one(s) and reference those in

- --
Gary V. Vaughan      ())_.  address@hidden,}
Research Scientist   ( '/
GNU Hacker           / )=
Technical Author   `(_~)_
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -


reply via email to

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