[Flac-dev] 1.0 candidate checked in

[Josh Coalson]

--- Matt Zimmerman <mdz at debian.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2001 at 04:06:14PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> 
> > Argh.  Maybe libtool will have to get involved after all.  I'll
> work on it
> > this afternoon.
> 
> I think I give up.  automake and libtool assume that the compiler
> will be able
> to assemble stuff, and compilers don't generally understand NASM
> input.  I
> don't like the strip_fPIC bit, since just about anything that could
> go in
> CFLAGS might be passed by libtool, and nasm doesn't understand
> compiler flags.
> 
>...
>
> The
> way I see it, we have two options:
> 
> 1. Ship with libtool 1.4b.  This is pre-release software, and I don't
> know what
>    issues might be associated with it.
> 
> 2. Ship with libtool 1.4.  Users who want to use a later version on
> i386 will
>    have to make a small patch to the ia32 makefile.
> 
> The good news is, libtool 1.4b seems to support enable/disable of
> shared
> library building at runtime, so we won't need that awful
> libtool-disable-static
> bit anymore.  We can just use --tag=disable-shared once we ship that
> version.
> Also, I think it should be possible to create a tagged configuration
> for NASM
> so we don't have to worry about the -fPIC issue.
> 
> I like what I see in libtool 1.4b, but I don't know if its widespread
> use is
> recommended yet.  Ideas?

I thought about shipping the 1.4 files as you had described,
then having a Makefile2.{am,in} in libFLAC and libFLAC/ia32
with Ben's version that users can copy in if the regular
ones break, plus a note in the README file.

Kind of kludgey.  I am dreading a flood of mails to the
list like 'flac won't compile!'.

Josh


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/