X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<4A7F098B.6030904@users.sourceforge.net>
Date:	Sun, 09 Aug 2009 12:38:19 -0500
From:	"Yaakov (Cygwin/X)" <yselkowitz AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.1) Gecko/20090715 Thunderbird/3.0b3
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: How to install-libLTLIBRARIES dll to bin?
References:	<6910a60907272310q54f29289l454117aff82afd5a AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <4A6ED94B DOT 8020003 AT gmail DOT com> <4A7E725C DOT 8010706 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <4A7ED3C9 DOT 70700 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm>
In-Reply-To:	<4A7ED3C9.70700@cwilson.fastmail.fm>
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On 09/08/2009 08:48, Charles Wilson wrote:
> Your patch does basically what Dave's horrible hack did, except his also
> works if you're installing somewhere other than under THE libdir. His
> patch "walks" up the directory tree from the .la file location, until it
> finds a great-uncle ../../../bin directory.

I considered such an approach, but what happens if you a prefix that 
doesn't yet exist on the system?  AFAICS you would have the library in 
$my_new_prefix/lib and the DLL in /bin, which doesn't seem quite right.

Shared libraries should be, and generally are, in or under $prefix/lib. 
  The only way I see my patch not helping is if the library is in or 
under $libexecdir AND --libexecdir is set to something other than 
$prefix/lib (like the GNU default $prefix/libexec).  But IMHO that would 
be a problem with the package in question.

> This part is messy -- and unnecessary for the intended use case. In gcc,
> all you need to do is explicitly modify the Makefile.am's to pass the
> necessary option. You don't need to do anything to automake or
> libtoolize, AFAICT.

But how would you make a patch in a form that would be accepted upstream?

> Which brings me to my question: Yaakov, what is the use case you have
> for this functionality?  Something other than gcc?

I have three cases where non-module libtool libraries are installed into 
a subdir of $prefix/lib:

* evolution: libraries under $libdir/evolution/$MAJOR.$MINOR

* mysql: libraries under $libdir/mysql

* libffi-3.0: usually under $prefix/lib, but I move the library under 
$prefix/lib/libffi/lib so that it's not grabbed accidentally instead of 
gcc's libffi (just like the headers are by default under 
$prefix/lib/libffi/include).


Yaakov

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -