[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupda
From: |
Michael Matz |
Subject: |
Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates] |
Date: |
Fri, 6 Apr 2001 06:24:43 +0200 (MET DST) |
Hi,
On 5 Apr 2001, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> > before: deplibs="-lfoo -lbar -lfoo -lfoo -lbar -lbar -lfoo"
> > after: deplibs="-lbar -lfoo -lbar -lfoo"
>
> > This cuts down on all the extraneous stuff *safely*, i think.
>
> It can't be proven to be safe. Consider that libfoo and libbar are
> static, such that:
> If you remove the first -lfoo, you'll get an `f4 undefined' error.
>
> It's always safe to remove duplicates of a library when they're
> consecutive, though.
I thought this thing was only a typo in edwards code (I think so, because
he forgot to add the first library _at all_ which clearly is wrong anyway,
so I didn't mention it. The loop itself works as intended and removes
only consecutive multiple libs)
Ciao,
Michael.
- RE: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cyg winupdates], Boehne, Robert, 2001/04/04
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates], edward, 2001/04/05
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates], Alexandre Oliva, 2001/04/05
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates],
Michael Matz <=
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates], Alexandre Oliva, 2001/04/06
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates], edward, 2001/04/06
- Re: FYI: duplicate removal patch [Was Re: ok, new libtool for cygwinupdates], s_a_white, 2001/04/07