[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 279-gary-LT_CONFIG_LTDL_DIR.diff
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: 279-gary-LT_CONFIG_LTDL_DIR.diff |
Date: |
Thu, 29 Sep 2005 18:39:28 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.11 |
Hi Gary,
* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 06:32:32PM CEST:
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>
> >I believe it is fixed with the following patch. OK to apply?
> >
> > * libtoolize.m4sh (func_included_files): Do not recurse
> > non-existent files.
>
> Looks okay to me.
Applied.
> >(By the way, the use of global variables prefixed with my_ really sucks
> >here; I also needed some time to realize that you are actually not using
> >them wrongly.)
>
> Patches always welcome ;-)
I know.
> This patch is just to introduce LT_CONFIG_LTDL_DIR without regressions.
> The rest of the fixes for LT_WITH_LTDL are yet to be split into separate
> patches and posted for review.
OK. Good point.
> > -with-included-ltdl=no
> >all end up with
> >| checking whether to use included libltdl... yes
> >
> >I believe this worked in the last iteration of your patch.
>
> The previous iteration was checking for lt_dlcaller_register which is a
> different API to what we have now. This patch now checks for
> lt_dlinterface_register, which I guess your installed libltdl doesn't
> have?
D'oh, d'oh, d'oh.
> For clarity, I've changed the messages to read something like:
>
> checking for lt_dlinterface_register in -lltdl... no
> checking whether to use included libltdl... yes
Thank you! Man, did I go blind or what..
> >It's a twisted maze. :-/
>
> That's why it's taken me a month to fix it :-( At least breaking it into
> pieces for the commit is giving it an excellent review though. Thanks!
Surely.
Cheers,
Ralf