On Oct 10, 2008, at 2:31 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
David Woodhouse wrote:
On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 19:36 +0200, Karsten Hopp wrote:
Getting libtool-2.2 into F-11 is my plan, but I most likely need
to get that through
FESCo as it breaks up to 300 packages according to my mass
rebuilds. I'm going to
prepare a Wiki page with details about that.
Isn't the whole point of libtool that it should make things _easier_,
not break huge swathes of packages whenever we change it?
How about we fix those 300 packages by making them _not_ use libtool,
rather than making them use the latest version?
Hand coding Makefiles to compile shared libraries on all platforms
is .
Before libtools many upstreams simply wouldn't package shared
libraries
because of all the problems with getting it right for SunOS, Solaris,
OpenBSD, NetBSD, i386BSD, FreeBSD, AIX, Linux-aout, Linux-elf, gcc,
acc,
etc. If the state of the art has advanced and there's a tool that can
replace libtool so a developer can say "I want a shared library" and
the
tool builds it on all platforms then we could look into getting
upstreams to switch but simply getting rid of libtool in favour of
handcoding Makefiles to build shared libraries is a step in the wrong
direction.
Spec files that are breaking because they're running libtoolize/
auto[re]conf should be fixed, obviously. Wholesale replacement of
packages' build systems is intractable and a silly suggestion.
This conversation really can't proceed productively without some
concrete information about the nature of the failures.
Braden
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
