Re: AC_LIBOBJ

[Andy Smith]

On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 10:56:43AM +0100, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> >>> "Andy" == Andy Smith <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> [...]
> 
>  Andy> But when I do "autoconf && automake" I get:
> 
>  Andy> src/Makefile.am:9: @LTLIBOBJS@ seen but never set in `configure.in'
>  Andy> src/Makefile.am:13: @LIBOBJS@ seen but never set in `configure.in'
>  Andy> src/Makefile.am:18: @LIBOBJS@ seen but never set in `configure.in'

[...]

> In other words you could get rid of these diagnostics using
> AC_SUBST([LIBOBJS]) and AC_SUBST([LTLIBOBJS]), or by upgrading
> to a recent Automake.

As mentioned in the previous email, I found I did not need to use
AC_SUBST([LIBOBJS]) and my Makefile.am lines that include @LIBOBJS@
now work correctly.

However, the libfoo_la_LIBADD line that needed @LTLIBOBJS@ doesn't
work (I get the above error).  I tried doing as you suggest and
added:

AC_SUBST([LTLIBOBJS])

to my configure.in, which made the diagnostic go away, however it
just replaces @LTLIBOBJS@ with nothing.  I need it to replace it
with snprintf.lo.

As a long shot I tried using @LIBOBJS@ on that line instead.  That
does actually works but gives dire warnings during build (as
expected) about how using libtool to link against object files that
end in .o is not portable.  The whole reason for doing this is
portability, so I don't really want to leave it there.

Where am I going wrong?  How does LTLIBOBJS get built from LIBOBJS
and how do I get that to happen since I'm unable to do it myself
(autoconf will exit with an error if I try to mention LIBOBJS
myself)?

If upgrading automake will fix this then I'm prepared to do it, but
it won't make me popular with my fellow developers.