[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AM_LIBS / AM_LDADD
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: AM_LIBS / AM_LDADD |
Date: |
Tue, 6 Nov 2007 18:42:28 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-04) |
Hello BenoƮt,
* NightStrike wrote on Tue, Nov 06, 2007 at 03:29:05PM CET:
> On 11/6/07, Benoit SIGOURE <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Hi list,
> > would anyone be against the introduction of AM_LIBS / AM_LDADD
> > (before the release of 1.11) to be more consistent with the existing
> > AM_*flags?
For consistency, AM_LIBADD should be added as well. And the new
variables should probably have semantics comparable to LIBS, LDADD,
and *_LIBADD, respectively.
> Can you add to that also AM_DLLTOOLFLAGS?
It's been mentioned before: Automake currently does not use dlltool.
What would AM_DLLTOOLFLAGS be for then? Support for it would be a null
change. Just put $(AM_DLLTOOLFLAGS) into your self-written rules that
use dlltool, and there you have it: support for AM_DLLTOOLFLAGS!
Cheers,
Ralf
- AM_LIBS / AM_LDADD, Benoit SIGOURE, 2007/11/06
- Re: AM_LIBS / AM_LDADD, NightStrike, 2007/11/06
- Re: AM_LIBS / AM_LDADD,
Ralf Wildenhues <=
- Re: AM_LIBS / AM_LDADD, NightStrike, 2007/11/06
- Re: AM_LIBS / AM_LDADD, Ralf Wildenhues, 2007/11/06
- Re: AM_LIBS / AM_LDADD, NightStrike, 2007/11/06
- Re: AM_LIBS / AM_LDADD, Brian Dessent, 2007/11/06
- Re: AM_LIBS / AM_LDADD, Ralf Wildenhues, 2007/11/06