libtool-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: patch for "g++-x.x" named compilers


From: Robert Boehne
Subject: Re: patch for "g++-x.x" named compilers
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 11:53:24 -0600

Aargh, Yes, I agree that this is a better route to
prevent breakage with upgrading in the cases where it
used to work.  I'll re-do the patch to depricate and
warn with corresponding changes to libtool documentation.

Thanks,

Robert

Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 27 Oct 2002, Albert Chin wrote:
> > > All right then, here it is.  This patch replaces the guessing
> > > of operation mode with an error message, and removes the variable
> > > default_mode as it is no longer used.
> > >
> > > Ok to commit?
> >
> > This means that people upgrading from 1.3.x or 1.4.x to 1.5.x will
> > have to retool how they invoke libtool. Do we really want to do this?
> 
> It is true that the examples in the existing libtool documentation are
> making use of implicit mode detection.  In my opinion, this was a bad
> original design decision, but since the documentation doesn't cover
> the explicit mode option, I need to change the recommendation I made
> just a minute ago.
> 
> Since the implicit mode detection is impossible to support properly, I
> recommend that the libtool documentation be updated, and that libtool
> issue a warning that the implicit mode is deprecated.
> 
> Bob
> ======================================
> Bob Friesenhahn
> address@hidden
> http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Libtool-patches mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool-patches




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]