Re: Ignore hardcode_direct=yes if results in static lib entry

[Gary V. Vaughan]

Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Hello,

Howdy!

> * Albert Chin wrote on Wed, May 17, 2006 at 03:18:09AM CEST:
>
> > The following patch addresses
> > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool/2006-04/msg00044.html. I
> > added a new variable, hardcode_direct_static, to indicate if
> > hardcode_direct=yes would hardcode a static library dependency. This
> > impacts HP-UX/PA and AIX.
> >
> > Patch against HEAD.
>
>
> This patch is missing a documentation update (doc/libtool.texi).

I'll commit one presently.

> I'm not sure whether it should be backported, probably not.

Looks like a new feature to me... no backport rqd imho.

> Does the testsuite pass with this?

It passes on my Gentoo and Tiger laptops.  I believe Albert has seen
no regressions on his architectures (judging by the related testsuite
patch).

> > 2006-05-16  Albert Chin-A-Young  <address@hidden>
> >
> >         * libltdl/config/ltmain.m4sh, libltdl/m4/libtool.m4
> >         (_LT_LINKER_SHLIBS, _LT_LANG_CXX_CONFIG, _LT_LANG_F77_CONFIG,
> > 	_LT_LANG_FC_CONFIG) [ aix4*, aix5*, hpux10*, hpux11* ]: 
> > 	Introduce a new variable, hardcode_direct_static, which
> >         would ignore hardcode_direct=yes if the result would create a
> >         static library dependency. Static library dependencies are
> >         immune to $shlibpath_var.

Cheers,
        Gary.
--
Gary V. Vaughan      ())_.  address@hidden,gnu.org}
Research Scientist   ( '/   http://blog.azazil.net
GNU Hacker           / )=   http://trac.azazil.net/projects/libtool
Technical Author   `(_~)_   http://sources.redhat.com/autobook