Russ Allbery <rra@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > "Dr. David Kirkby" <david.kirkby@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> I'd rather not use libtool - I don't want to learn yet another >> tool. Especially since it has already caused me some grief on Solaris. > > I used to feel that way, but I'm personally switching everything over to > it, particularly as I have access to fewer and fewer platforms myself. I > don't think it provides as much portability in some cases as hand-tuned > linker flags, but unless one has access to a ton of different systems, > it's hard to hand-tune the flags in all the ways needed. > > However, lintian still doesn't solve all the problems. For example, all > the flags I mentioned in my previous message are ones that lintian has no > API for, so you still have to figure out what flags to pass to the > underlying linker. Lintian's Autoconf probes do help a bit because > lintian has to check for things like whether the GNU linker is in use > itself. > > You could also steal code from lintian's Autoconf probes without using it > directly. I've done that before for some projects. I think that many (but perhaps not all) of the instances of "lintian" above should actually refer to "libtool". -- "Long noun chains don't automatically imply security." --Bruce Schneier _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
