Re: problems with 0.12.1

[Bruno Haible]

Edward Peschko wrote:
> What effort was made to make 0.12.1 backwards compatible with 0.10.40?

libintl 0.12.1 is backward compatible with 0.10.40. I.e. all functions
from libintl 0.10.40 are 100% supported by libintl 0.12.1.

> bash-2.05b doesn't compile, neither does binutils-2.14, nor bison-1.28, nor
> enscript-1.6.1, nor does gdb-5.3..

Did you possibly modify the source of these packages before building them
(maybe using gettextize with incorrect arguments or so)? I would not recommend
to do this, unless you are the maintainer of these packages.

> all of them complain of having 'undefined symbols' (of various sorts,
> all prefixed by 'libintl_'. This is all on sun solaris 2.8

Looks like the <libintl.h> picked up by the preprocessor is the one from
gettext 0.12.1, but the libintl.so picked up by the linker is either the
Solaris one or the gettext 0.10.40 one. Have you checked that your -I and
-L options in CPPFLAGS and LDFLAGS (or both in CFLAGS) are consistent?

A possible cause of this can also be if you have configured a gcc < 3.2
with the same --prefix option as you used for the older libiconv. This is
fatal, because these versions of gcc implicitly use -L$prefix/lib but *not*
-I$prefix/include. The workaround is to use a different --prefix for gcc.

Bruno