Re: AC_MSG_RESULT(patching libtool to fix HIDEOUS BREAKAGE) [was Re:dconf 0.5]

On Wed, 2010-08-04 at 16:33 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Hi,

> Given this I'm not sure why nobody has ever replaced libtool while
> keeping automake. For me it's probably 1) automake is written in perl
> which I just don't speak and 2) suspicion that automake upstream
> wouldn't take the patch. I am completely happy with automake
> (especially when used nonrecursively). But libtool is too
> anti-productivity to live. If automake could just build a frickin'
> shared library instead of .la-hell, it would be a big upgrade.
> Or if someone could fix libtool so it isn't slow, and doesn't create
> annoying .la files on platforms that don't require them, that would be
> great too.

What about ? The approach taken here sounds
quite reasonable and has the potential to cut down compile time
significantly while keeping the portability of libtool without having to
reimplement it.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]