This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: PCRE package for consideration
- From: "Max Bowsher" <maxb at ukf dot net>
- To: "Ronald Landheer-Cieslak" <ronald at landheer dot com>,"Gerrit P. Haase" <gp at familiehaase dot de>
- Cc: <cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 11:34:11 +0100
- Subject: Re: PCRE package for consideration
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0304301130580.23693-100000@localhost.localdomain>
Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
>>> When taking a look at the generated cygpcreposix-0.dll, you'll see that
>>> the link is OK: the DLL depends on the local cygpcre-0.dll
>
>>> It's the relink during the install that breaks the library:
>> yep.
>
>>> So, if we really want to use Libtool, would doing a
>>> libtool --finish /usr/lib
>>> in a postinstall script fix this?
>> I guess with the patch Charles Wilson posted yesterday it should be ok,
>> though I havn't tested it yet but I trust him, he is the libtool
>> master;)
> In that case, we'll have to wait for his patch to make it to Cygwin's
> libtool to be able to use libtool for pcre. I will not use a CVS version
> of libtool to make a release of a package - mostly because I don't know
> libtool well enough to trust the CVS version blindly (although I have
> every confidence in the Libtool developers, but IMO, if they thought it
> was ready for release, they'd release it).
Um, what?
Charles' patch was to PCRE's Makefile.in, not to libtool.
> As for the patch itself: I haven't seen it (neither on any of the Cygwin
> lists I read (and the developers list is the only one I don't read
> regularly) nor on the libtool patch list, so I can't test it here :|
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2003-04/msg00378.html
and
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2003-04/msg00379.html
Max.