Re: [PATCH] [mingw|cygwin] Modify cwrapper to invoke target directly.

[Eric Blake]

Eric Blake <ebb9 <at> byu.net> writes:

> 
> | +      /* otherwise ... */
> | +      newargz[++newargc] = xstrdup (argv[i]);
> 
> Shouldn't you handle "--" as the end of wrapper options, in case the user
> really wants to pass --lt-env-* as the first option to the wrapped executable?

This caused a regression caught by the m4 testsuite.

Beforehand, running the uninstalled libtool wrapper as:

m4 -- -d

was equivalent to

m4 ./-d

But now, the wrapper eats the first --, resulting in the (much different)

m4 -d

Running the cwrapper with an extra -- restores the old behavior;

m4 -- -- -d

but this is also unacceptable, because in a static build, there is no cwrapper, 
which means the uninstalled m4 executable would behave as if called by

m4 ./-- ./-d

which is also wrong.



I see two options:

1. Entirely revert the portion of the cwrapper that looks for --.  Instead, 
make the cwrapper only recognize leading --lt-* options, and pass all remaining 
options as is; and document that the --lt-* option namespace is reserved for 
the wrapper.  Pro: easier to implement, simplifies the cwrapper.  Con: the 
wrapped executable can't be handed a leading argument in the --lt-* namespace.

2. Instead of using --, invent a new cwrapper option --lt-end-options that does 
the same concept.  Pro: no infringment on the application; if an application 
truly needs to use --lt-* as its first argument, it can decide whether to add 
the --lt-end-options marker based on whether it was compiled statically or 
not.  Con: rather complicated just to support a corner case of uninstalled 
applications, and we must document how the package can tell whether the 
uninstalled program is a cwrapper or a static executable, to know whether --lt-
end-options is needed.

If you haven't guessed, I'm leaning towards option 1.  Any other comments on 
this issue?

-- 
Eric Blake