[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: libtool fails with uninstalled frameworks and the -F flag
From: |
Peter O'Gorman |
Subject: |
Re: libtool fails with uninstalled frameworks and the -F flag |
Date: |
Sat, 1 Feb 2014 12:31:48 -0800 |
Hmm, -F should be passed through unmolested.
# Flags to be passed through unchanged, with rationale:
# -64, -mips[0-9] enable 64-bit mode for the SGI compiler
# -r[0-9][0-9]* specify processor for the SGI compiler
# -xarch=*, -xtarget=* enable 64-bit mode for the Sun compiler
# +DA*, +DD* enable 64-bit mode for the HP compiler
# -q* compiler args for the IBM compiler
# -m*, -t[45]*, -txscale* architecture-specific flags for GCC
# -F/path path to uninstalled frameworks, gcc on darwin
# -p, -pg, --coverage, -fprofile-* profiling flags for GCC
# @file GCC response files
# -tp=* Portland pgcc target processor selection
# --sysroot=* for sysroot support
# -O*, -g*, -flto*, -fwhopr*, -fuse-linker-plugin GCC link-time
optimization
# -stdlib=* select c++ std lib with clang
-64|-mips[0-9]|-r[0-9][0-9]*|-xarch=*|-xtarget=*|+DA*|+DD*|-q*|-m*| \
-t[45]*|-txscale*|-p|-pg|--coverage|-fprofile-*|-F*|@*|-tp=*|--sysroot=*|
\
-O*|-g*|-flto*|-fwhopr*|-fuse-linker-plugin|-stdlib=*)
What version of GNU libtool are you using?
Peter
On Jan 31, 2014, at 3:06 PM, Michael C. Grant <address@hidden> wrote:
> Gary,
>
> Sorry for the delay. I think I'm going to have to give up on this one. I'm
> afraid my understanding of libtool internals as well as Darwin -framework
> idiosyncracies are insufficient to the task.
>
> Fortunately, the issue we were having with Octave compilation has been
> resolved by other means (actually by forcing link-all-dependencies in libtool
> whenever an uninstalled framework is encountered).
>
> Feel free to close this for now. If I get ambitious and figure things out
> more fully I will take another crack at it.
>
> On Jan 13, 2014, at 8:50 PM, Gary V. Vaughan <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> [moved to libtool-patches list]
>>
>> On Jan 14, 2014, at 11:45 AM, Michael C. Grant <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm trying to compile GNU Octave and its new Qt GUI on a Mac OSX with
>>> Homebrew. Homebrew installs the Qt frameworks in
>>> /usr/local/Cellar/qt/4.8.5/lib, so after some fiddling with the configure
>>> script I get this:
>>>
>>> QT_LDFLAGS=-F/usr/local/Cellar/qt/4.8.5/lib
>>> QT_LIBS=-framework QtCore -framework QtGui -framework QtNetwork
>>>
>>> However, the libtool script does not handle the -F argument through
>>> properly, so it is stripped out of the linking process.
>>>
>>> I created the following patch for the generated libtool script, which
>>> causes libtool to treat -F exactly like it treats -L. This seems to do the
>>> trick.
>>>
>>> I did notice that scanning through past discussions that this has come up a
>>> couple of times, but there is reluctance to provide full support for -F for
>>> some reason. Perhaps the relative simplicity of this patch would convince
>>> you to reconsider. I'm also discussing this with the Homebrew folks to see
>>> if they would consider including in their formula, but they do prefer not
>>> to use patches if they can help it.
>>
>> Thanks for the patch. Sorry I didn't reply to your earlier emails - I
>> marked them for further attention, but didn't make the time to actually go
>> back and respond.
>>
>> My main worry is whether that changing libtool's treatment of -F is going to
>> do something unexpected on another platform. That said, apart from your
>> conflating of -L and -F in the case branches with the patch you sent, I'm
>> open to including it in the upcoming release if you don't mind reworking it
>> a little?
>>
>> Please keep the -L and -F branches separate, factoring the branch bodies
>> into a shell function if necessary to prevent cut-n-pasting blocks of code
>> between the two. Bonus points if you could also make -F behave as before on
>> all platforms but *-darwin*.
>>
>> If you have github, I keep a mirror of libtool at
>> http://github.com/gvvaughan/GNU-libtool, so that might be a more convenient
>> way for you to submit a pull request than dropping patch attachments into
>> the mailing list.
>>
>> I have a couple of small fixes of my own that I need to polish and push, and
>> then I'll do another round of platform testing to nail down what else is a
>> show-stopper for a final pre-release.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> --
>> Gary V. Vaughan (gary AT gnu DOT org)
>
>
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: libtool fails with uninstalled frameworks and the -F flag,
Peter O'Gorman <=