On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 00:28 -0500, Peter Jones wrote: > Responding to the correct mailing list for this discussion. Cc:ing the other one. > > Ulrich Drepper wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > John Dennis wrote: > >> I've had my fill of autotool problems (especially libtool) > > > > Don't throw in libtool with the rest. libtool was available in the > > spirit of the auto tools only in its very first version (which of those > > reading this only Jim and Tom will know). Right, ... and libtool-2 is a completely different beast once again. Future will tell if it improves or worsens the situation. It definitely cleans up part of the mess older libtools suffered from. > I agree that a Linux-only replacement for libtool should be used, if at all. So > why isn't there one available in Fedora that deps on "libtool" will pick by default? Such a tool would widely contradict libtools purposes (portability). I.e. such a tool will only help "linux-only packages" and package for which portability to other OS is of minor interest (such as glibc). Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
