[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: patch for "g++-x.x" named compilers
From: |
Robert Boehne |
Subject: |
Re: patch for "g++-x.x" named compilers |
Date: |
Mon, 28 Oct 2002 21:24:43 -0600 |
Hello!
This patch adds a warning to users that forcing Libtool to
guess the mode of operation is depricated, including changes
to the documentation. Have a look, and let me know if any
changes are needed.
Thanks,
Robert
Robert Boehne wrote:
>
> Aargh, Yes, I agree that this is a better route to
> prevent breakage with upgrading in the cases where it
> used to work. I'll re-do the patch to depricate and
> warn with corresponding changes to libtool documentation.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Robert
>
> Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 27 Oct 2002, Albert Chin wrote:
> > > > All right then, here it is. This patch replaces the guessing
> > > > of operation mode with an error message, and removes the variable
> > > > default_mode as it is no longer used.
> > > >
> > > > Ok to commit?
> > >
> > > This means that people upgrading from 1.3.x or 1.4.x to 1.5.x will
> > > have to retool how they invoke libtool. Do we really want to do this?
> >
> > It is true that the examples in the existing libtool documentation are
> > making use of implicit mode detection. In my opinion, this was a bad
> > original design decision, but since the documentation doesn't cover
> > the explicit mode option, I need to change the recommendation I made
> > just a minute ago.
> >
> > Since the implicit mode detection is impossible to support properly, I
> > recommend that the libtool documentation be updated, and that libtool
> > issue a warning that the implicit mode is deprecated.
> >
? dont-inferr-mode.patch
Index: ltmain.in
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/libtool/libtool/ltmain.in,v
retrieving revision 1.307
diff -u -r1.307 ltmain.in
--- ltmain.in 28 Oct 2002 15:38:37 -0000 1.307
+++ ltmain.in 29 Oct 2002 03:30:43 -0000
@@ -268,6 +268,8 @@
# Infer the operation mode.
if test -z "$mode"; then
+ $echo "*** Warning: inferring the mode of operation is depricated." 1>&2
+ $echo "*** Future versions of Libtool will require -mode=MODE be
specified." 1>&2
case $nonopt in
*cc | cc* | *++ | gcc* | *-gcc* | g++* | xlc*)
mode=link
Index: doc/libtool.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/libtool/libtool/doc/libtool.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.126
diff -u -r1.126 libtool.texi
--- doc/libtool.texi 28 Oct 2002 15:38:37 -0000 1.126
+++ doc/libtool.texi 29 Oct 2002 03:30:49 -0000
@@ -1081,10 +1081,13 @@
displayed.
@item address@hidden
-Use @var{mode} as the operation mode. By default, the operation mode is
-inferred from the @var{mode-args}.
+Use @var{mode} as the operation mode. If not specified, an attempt is
+made to inferr the operation mode from the @var{mode-args}. Not specifying
+the @var{mode} is currently depricated, as there are too many situations
+where it is not possible to guess. Future versions of Libtool will require
+that @var{mode} be explicity set.
-If @var{mode} is specified, it must be one of the following:
address@hidden must be set to one of the following:
@table @samp
@item compile
- patch for "g++-x.x" named compilers, Ossama Othman, 2002/10/24
- Re: patch for "g++-x.x" named compilers, Bob Friesenhahn, 2002/10/24
- Re: patch for "g++-x.x" named compilers, Robert Boehne, 2002/10/24
- Re: patch for "g++-x.x" named compilers, Bob Friesenhahn, 2002/10/24
- Re: patch for "g++-x.x" named compilers, Robert Boehne, 2002/10/27
- Re: patch for "g++-x.x" named compilers, Albert Chin, 2002/10/27
- Re: patch for "g++-x.x" named compilers, Bob Friesenhahn, 2002/10/27
- Re: patch for "g++-x.x" named compilers, Robert Boehne, 2002/10/27
- Re: patch for "g++-x.x" named compilers,
Robert Boehne <=
- Re: patch for "g++-x.x" named compilers, Bob Friesenhahn, 2002/10/28
- Re: patch for "g++-x.x" named compilers, Bob Friesenhahn, 2002/10/27