Re: [cygwin] cwrapper emits wrapper script

[Noah Misch]

On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 05:20:05PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, 25 May 2007 11:27:08 -0400, "Charles Wilson" said:
> > On May 4, 2007, Charles Wilson wrote:
> > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool-patches/2007-04/msg00088.html

> Ping * 3.

I don't speak for the Libtool maintainers, but I'll throw out my impressions of
the patch, in case it might help move things along.  Not using Cygwin or MSYS
myself these days, I trust that the patch improves things there as you say it
does.  It seems fairly harmless from the perspective of all other platforms.

Long-term, we can revise this cumbersome division of work between the executable
wrapper and the wrapper script.  Ideally, the wrapper methodology for Unix
should resemble that for Cygwin/MSYS, so we don't have an extra code path
potentially subject to bitrot.  This patch does not introduce those problems,
however, and seems to improve the current situation.

>From a purely Unix-centric standpoint, I would pass the script to a shell via a
pipe, rather than writing it out to a file.  Is that too much for MSYS?


One specific thought:

> +  # cygwin/mingw cwrapper will rewrite this line:
> +  WRAPPER_SCRIPT_BELONGS_IN_OBJDIR=no
...
> +           func_emit_libtool_wrapper_script |
> +               $SED -e 's/\([\\"]\)/\\\1/g' \
> +                    -e 's/\(WRAPPER_SCRIPT_BELONGS_IN_OBJDIR\)=.*/\1=yes/' \
> +                    -e 's/^/"/' -e 's/$/\\n"/' 

This will be cleaner if you pass the value of WRAPPER_SCRIPT_BELONGS_IN_OBJDIR
as an argument to func_emit_libtool_wrapper_script, rather than hard-coding the
"no" and filtering it after the fact.


Hope that's useful.