Re: [PATCH 2/N] LIBTOOLFLAGS, and *_LINK fixes for Automake 1.11

[Dave Korn <dave dot korn dot cygwin at googlemail dot com>]

Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hello Dave,

  'lo!

> * Dave Korn wrote on Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 04:10:13PM CEST:
>>>   Is it possible that this patch is related to a problem I'm experiencing on
>>> HEAD (r151124) where LTLDFLAGS in libstdc++-v3/src appears no longer to be
>>> used in the final link of libstdc++.la?
>>>
>>>   It used to be that LTLDFLAGS was included in CXXLINK, which was used in the
>>> rule for linking libstdc++.la, but now that rule uses libstdc___la_LINK
>>> instead.  Is it perhaps the case that both LTLDFLAGS and CXXLINK are now
>>> obsolete in the v3 makefiles and don't need to be defined at all?
> 
> Aww darn.  That patch was borked too.  :-/
> 
> libstdc++-v3/src
> boehm-gc
> libgomp
> libjava
> 
> seem affected, too.
> 
>>   Not that I'm suggesting for a minute that the right thing to do for me
>> wouldn't be to use libstdc___la_LDFLAGS instead; I'm just curious if those two
>> definitions can be removed.
> 
> Curious what you used to detect this.  I would like to make sure I
> haven't overlooked any other instances; I'll work on it this weekend
> (unless you beat me to it).

  I only noticed it because I have an outstanding patch that builds libstdc++
as a DLL and it stopped producing a DLL when I merged up to HEAD.

> I'll work on it this weekend (unless you beat me to it).

  Not really sure what the problem is?  Will the outcome of your solution be
that LTLDFLAGS again works in the way I was previously using it?  I'm
perfectly happy to add my -no-undefined to libstdc___la_LDFLAGS, which I think
is probably actually a better (because more specific) location for it.

    cheers,
      DaveK