[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Auto(conf|make) style questions
From: |
tomas |
Subject: |
Re: Auto(conf|make) style questions |
Date: |
Sat, 22 Mar 2003 09:32:32 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.28i |
On Fri, Mar 21, 2003 at 09:17:17PM +0100, Alexandre Duret-Lutz wrote:
> >>> "tomas" == tomas <address@hidden> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> >> NEON_COMPAT="$NEON_COMPAT scm_c_string2str.lo"
> tomas> ^^^^ EEEK! ;-)
>
> [...]
>
> tomas> If I understand the configury documentation correctly -- isn't using
> tomas> explicit dynamic object endings a ``Don't Do That?'' and exactly what
> tomas> $(LIBOBJS) or $(LTLIBOBJS) is supposed to handle for you? For .lo is
> tomas> platform specific...
>
> No. `.lo' is portable. What wasn't portable in the way people used
> to define LTLIBOBJS from LIBOBJS was the hardcoding of `.o'.
Ah, I stand corrected. Thanks a lot for the clarification. Then your suggestion
makes indeed a lot of sense.
Regards
-- tomas