Re: libtool.texi: need_lib_prefix doc

[Ralf Wildenhues]

* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 01:13:59PM CET:
> 
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > This description looks fishy to me: (use fixed-width font)
> 
> Having looked at the code in ltmain.m4sh, how about using this in 
> libtool.texi:
> 
> @defvar need_lib_prefix
> Whether we can @code{dlopen} modules without a @samp{lib} prefix.
> Set to @samp{yes} or @samp{no}.  By default, it is @samp{unknown}, which
> means the same as @samp{yes}, but documents that we are not really sure
> about it.  @samp{no} means that it is possible to @code{dlopen} a
> module without the @samp{lib} prefix.

Sure.  Should I check it in?

> > | link against a library without 'lib' prefix,
> > | i.e. it requires @var{hardcode_direct} to be @samp{yes}.
> > | @end defvar
> > 
> > .. but since I haven't grasped the hardcode_direct addendum:
> > Which is the right way?
> 
> I think the addendum is trying to say: the library rpath needs to be set at
> linktime in order for the runtime loader to find a library named without the
> `lib' prefix.
>
> That may, or may not be true.  Either way, I don't see how the value in
> need_lib_prefix is affected by that consideration, so I think we can safely
> drop that part of the description.

OK.

Regards,
Ralf