Re: [Protux-devel] autostuff problems ... really annoying me

[Martin Herren]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

bringing the thread back to the mailing-list, it was my fault with last
reply i sent it only to Luciano.

Luciano Giordana wrote:
| > could you send the error you get with a fresh and clean checkout,
| > without any modifications (not even using ccache) ?
|
| cant do it.. right after checking out, I got the AC_ALSA_PATH (or
something
| like that, not here in hands right now) and nothing else goes on...

???

| >One of the problems you described:
| >
| >libtool: link: unable to infer tagged > configuration
| >libtool: link: specify a tag with `--tag'
| >
| >seems to come from using ccache with libtool. I > don't really know why
| >for the moment, but with the researches i did > until now it's probably
| >because of libtool.
|
| I removed the ccache.. it indeed wokred, but the problem is other..
| libmustux.so.0 not found , when running protux...

where did you install libmustux ? have you manually checked that
libmustux.so.0 is where it should be and that it is readable ???

| > I don't think autostuff needs a full revision... just some tuning,
| > optimization and so on. I think we got the base concept right now.
| > Autostuff is in it's third revision now, and it's the first time it
| > seems to work really well (except for you).
| > Perhaps you remember all user complaining about compilation problems
| > before we had autotools, admin/... and kde stuff problems in the first
| > version, timestamps and broken ./configure problems in the second
| > revision... they all seem gone now ;-)
| > Now if there is a compilation problem, it's usually only a small thing
| > like qtdevel (moc) stuff not installed, and can easily be fixed.
| >
| > Can you tell me _which_ package use a simpler approach ? I'll take a
| > look at it.
| > For libtool... i'm sorry but we'll have to keep it for Mustux. We could
| > drop it for Protux, but that would mean not compiling filters as a
| > static library. I never decided to make it this way, it was already this
| > way when i kind of took autostuff over after it's first generation. And
| > i think it was so 'cause your original Makefile handled it that way.
| > If you want to drop libtool in Protux, it's possible.
| >
| > For ccache i'll take a look at it.
|
| I am not requesting to drop autostuff, I am just requesting to review it.

ok

| For example, I still dont get why protux mustux use libtool.

because it's probably the only easy way to generate dynamic and static
libraries in a portable way.

| Filters subdirectory can be statically linked...

yes... like any other Protux class. BTW, i never understood why filters
have been compiled that way... In fact they are linked statically with
Protux, only first a static library is created, which Protux is
statically linked too. We can handle filters as any other class, without
first generating a lib. If it's ok that way for you, i'll do the change.

Of course in the future i think filters should be runtime loadable
plugins... but that's the future.

| also, I compiled postgresql,
| denemo, sodipodi and licq.. all them goes pretty fine with much less
output,
| in the same machine... :-(

ok, i'll look at it.

| anyway, I just wanted to get back to work, and the emergency makefiles are
| doing the job, so dont worry about this right now.. we will see that
later.

i don't agree... if you have problems with current autostuff, that means
other people potentially will have the same problems, and thus it needs
a fix... at least until the next release.

/Martin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Debian - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFAu0S5ENZb8plGFLQRAsAAAJ9ZIVPZigxaXJPKayXxm9bc4lIDqQCgwWKG
YfSL+voB264gOr0vlGagYgY=
=ofmQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----