This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: libtool version
- From: "Timothy J. Wood" <tjw at omnigroup dot com>
- To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 18:18:53 -0700
- Subject: Re: libtool version
Ah crud. Nevermind -- the offending shell code is in libtool 1.4.x
too. I just didn't see it since it gets generated by libtool.m4 and
some quoting crud.
Guess I'll either have to fix the quoting or determine that Mac OS X's
/bin/sh is busted.
-tim
On Sunday, May 19, 2002, at 06:02 PM, Timothy J. Wood wrote:
>
> On Sunday, May 19, 2002, at 03:48 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
>> On May 19, 2002, "Timothy J. Wood" <tjw@omnigroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Is there any big reason to not upgrade gcc to use the latest
>>> libtool release?
>>
>> The version in GCC is actually newer than libtool 1.4.x; it's an old
>> snapshot of the CVS tree that will eventually become libtool 1.5 (/me
>> wonders if 1.5 is out and I didn't notice :-), back from when it still
>> didn't require autoconf 2.5x.
>
> The problem is in ltcf-c.sh's definition of archive_expsym_cmds or
> the quoting of same that happens when it is written into the libtool
> script (this is when we're targeting MinGW, so it's all the dlltool
> crud). When that copy of libtool is run I get a bunch of errors.
>
> Unfortunately the quoting is arcane enough that I've not had any luck
> fixing it.
>
> I tried installing the lastest stable libtool, libtoolizing gcc and
> libobjc and had no luck. The ltconfig script appears to get run from
> the custom libtool.m4 -- but I tried linking that to the updated
> version from libtool and STILL got the stupid quoting problems
> (although I'm rerunning my build from clean now to see if stuff just
> got left around)
>
> -tim