httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sascha Schumann <sas...@schumann.cx>
Subject Re: Configuration...
Date Thu, 09 Nov 2000 20:54:54 GMT
>   1. Bug reports and patches sent to libtool get forwarded into
>      a black hole.

    While this seems to be a common perception, practice shows
    that it is not the case. I submitted a couple of patches and
    they were *always* accepted and almost instantly committed.

>   2. The focus of libtool (creating and managing shared libraries)
>      if different from what we need it for.

    Are there any platforms where shared library != DSO? If there
    are, does libtool take care of the difference?

    Yes, libtool does more than what we need. I fail to see how
    that disqualifies libtool.

>   3. It's horribly broken with traditional SysV ar

    I talked to Martin about this. There seems to be an obvious
    bug which just needs to get fixed. Give me an account on a
    test box where you can reproduce the mistake and I'll take
    care of it (including getting it into libtool CVS).

>   4. There is no way to force it to use a specific library.

    There is.

>   5. When it doesn't work (meaning, that it breaks or prevents
>      the build from completing) trying to backtrace where the
>      error is and determining how to work around it is very
>      tough due to #2 and the fact that the libtool code itself
>      is incredibly nasty.

    Well, that depends on how much you like Bourne shell code.
    Downtracing problems in libtool have never been a problem for
    me.

>   6. Unless you're running Linux and maybe *BSD, libtool
>      "gets in your way" thus reducing the available platforms
>      that Apache 2.0 will "seamlessly" build on as compared
>      to 1.3.

    We are literally outsourcing here. If you notice that libtool
    is still missing information for systems which are supported
    by Apache 1.3, add that to libtool.

    - Sascha


Mime
View raw message