libtool-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: FYI: escape shell meta-chars in tag variable comments [libtool--rele


From: Bob Friesenhahn
Subject: Re: FYI: escape shell meta-chars in tag variable comments [libtool--release--2.0--patch-10]
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 11:38:01 -0500 (CDT)

On Thu, 7 Oct 2004, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:

[ Did you send private on purpose? ]

Not particularly. Mostly it was sent privately since it didn't seem to have much value to the group, however, perhaps I was wrong.

* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Thu, Oct 07, 2004 at 04:44:11PM CEST:
part.  Do we have to do it like this?  Did released versions of Libtool
also create lines like this (i.e., do we have to support it anyway)?

The content of .la files has varied over the years and also varies
from system to system.  It seems like you will need to collect a few
thousand existing .la files from many different systems so the code
can be fully tested before it is deployed.

I would like to fix the possible syntax, not its semantics (most of
that is unnecessary for ltdl anyway).

I don't see how the syntax of existing .la files can be fixed. It may take several years before the world is using libtool 2.0 or later.

For example, can we disallow mixed quoting a la
 foo_command="bar"'baz'
rather can we find a set of allowed variables at all.

I don't think the syntax varies very much by system (it should not!),
rather by libtool version.  That's one thing I'd like to find out more
about.

What I mean by the syntax varying by system, it does vary since libtool contains oodles of rules which are selected based on ouput of config.guess and various tests. I am not sure how many permutations there are, but there seem to be quite a lot. We can only test on a small subset of available systems. Placing new limits on command syntax would mean that presumed working script fragments (many which were contributed by libtool users) in libtool would need to be re-evaluated and corrected, which may result in unexpected failure on systems we can't reasonably test on.

In summary, what I am saying is that applying the new rules would be difficult to implement in practice and would take substantial time.

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
address@hidden
http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]