This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Get rid of libtool? [was Re: Makefile problems]
- From: Bryce McKinlay <bryce at waitaki dot otago dot ac dot nz>
- To: Nic Ferrier <nferrier at tapsellferrier dot co dot uk>
- Cc: java at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 13:04:58 +1300
- Subject: Get rid of libtool? [was Re: Makefile problems]
- References: <3C78B3B6.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Nic Ferrier wrote:
>I'm sorry about that. It seems to the fault of my patch.
>I did do a full test (configure, build and install) of the patch on a
>fresh check out (with the diff applied). I'm not sure why that didn't
>catch the problem.
It is a dependency problem - ie if you touch a source file it will cause
everything to be rebuilt rather than just the other files which depend
on what you changed.
I must admit that, after a frustrating afternoon yesterday trying to
figure out silly libjava build problems when I really wanted to do
productive gcj hacking, I am sympathetic to RTH's recent suggestion that
we get rid of libtool (and automake?) and instead make sure that "gcc
-shared" knows how to build a shared library on all the platforms that
we care about.
I am convinced that this would result in a much more maintainable,
transparent, and above all _fast_ build system, in addition to making it
easier to implement libjava-specific requirements like package-at-a-time
So, is there anything important that we would lose from such a change?
Is there anything that libtool can do that GCC will never be able to do?
What platforms do we care about that GCC currently cant build a shared
library on (windows perhaps?).