[Xcb] [RFC PATCH] New XCB socket handoff mechanism for Xlib/XCB and other libraries
dberkholz at gentoo.org
Wed Mar 19 12:54:09 PDT 2008
On 09:12 Wed 19 Mar , Rémi Cardona wrote:
> Jamey Sharp a écrit :
> > Given what Josh tells me about this, it sounds like you have one of the
> > versions of libtool that's broken in how it handles library dependencies
> > on systems with reasonable linkers. On a system with GNU ld, for
> > example, there's no reason to include recursive library dependencies in
> > .la files.
> True, but libtool still includes everything, for backwards compatibility
> reasons (AIX, old HP-UX, ...).
> > In fact, as far as I understand, with a sensible linker there's no
> > reason for .la files at all, and you can solve this problem by simply
> > removing them all. :-)
> It's one solution which I've actually done to fix the libXCB -> libxcb
> transition on my system. Some apps that use libtool's dlopen wrapper
> will fail though (but that's beyond the scope of Xorg).
> If modular Xorg libs could come up with a common configure flag that
> would tell libtool not to install .la files, that would be great. I
> guess we (downstream distributors) could stop shipping .la files, but I
> guess it'd be better if such a behavior were to be standardized upstream.
Try sticking '-module' into the library's LDFLAGS in Makefile.am to do
that. Your template configure flag suggestion seems like something that
could be more suitable for autotools upstream than xorg, really.
More information about the xorg