This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Problems with using libtool dependencies in opcodes


On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 01:21:04PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> This problem:
>   http://sources.redhat.com/ml/binutils/2003-06/msg00025.html
> is still present, and it's causing me a real headache.
> 
> I had hopes that the latest version of libtool would fix it, so I did a
> hack-job to get all of binutils using the new version and tried again.  What
> we used to get was a command like this (roughly):
> 
> gcc -shared  .libs/dis-buf.o .libs/disassemble.o .libs/dis-init.o \
>   .libs/i386-dis.o  -L/opt/src/binutils/inst-tmp/obj/libiberty/pic \
>   -Wl,--rpath -Wl,/usr/local/lib -L/usr/local/lib -lbfd \
>   -Wl,-soname -Wl,libopcodes-2.14.90.so -o .libs/libopcodes-2.14.90.so
> 
> 
> Now we get:
> 
> gcc -shared  .libs/dis-buf.o .libs/disassemble.o .libs/dis-init.o \
>   .libs/i386-dis.o  -L/opt/src/binutils/inst-tmp/obj/libiberty/pic \
>   -L/opt/src/binutils/inst-tmp/inst/usr/local/lib -L/usr/local/lib -lbfd \
>   -Wl,-soname -Wl,libopcodes-2.14.90.so -o .libs/libopcodes-2.14.90.so
> 
> That fixes the immediate problem but opens up a whole new can of worms.  By
> adding -L$libdir to the path, my cross compiler configuration starts trying
> to open /usr/lib/libc.so, which points it to /lib/libc.so.6.
> 
> This means that the patch to fix opcodes' listed dependencies (which is a
> legitimate problem, but AFAIK only causes real-world problems with
> prelinking) has caused all sorts of build regressions.  I think that the
> cure is worse than the problem.
> 
> Does anyone have any bright ideas for making libtool behave?  If not how do
> you feel about reverting:
> 
> 2003-05-17  Andreas Jaeger  <aj@suse.de>
> 
>         * Makefile.am (libopcodes_la_LIBADD): Add libbfd.la.
>         (libopcodes_la_DEPENDENCIES): Add libbfd.la.
>         * Makefile.in: Regenerated.
> 
> until someone comes up with a bright idea?  Am I forgetting another problem
> this patch solved?

Unless someone can give me a reason that this patch is necessary, I
plan to revert it next week, with appropriate commentary.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]