- From: Arthur Smith <apsmith@aps.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 14:39:30 -0500
- To: Sam Varshavchik <mrsam@courier-mta.com>
- CC: www-lib@w3.org
Fewer library files (or just one) would be a little nicer - I've
certainly had occasions where I accidentally left off one of the
libraries and then was wondering what went wrong. No strong feelings on
this though.
Arthur
Sam Varshavchik wrote:
> Right now, apps that build against libwww link against about a whole
> bunch of libs that are listed by "libwww-config --libs". It's quite a
> mouthfull.
>
> That's how most apps are built. Perhaps it's just my personal taste,
> but I always thought that it's much cleaner and simpler just to link a
> single library.
>
> I've modified the Makefile to combine all component libraries into a
> single libtool target, libwww.la. As far as I can tell, the Makefile
> correctly handles all optionally-built submodules. That is, if
> --open-ssl is specified, libwww.la will include the SSL-related
> module, etc.
>
> I'd like to get a feel for what others think about this idea. If
> there's interest then I can submit the patch -- probably after the
> currently-pending code is released, so that I can resync against the
> released version.
>
> I should also clarify that my changes aren't really that drastic. All
> the existing components (libwwwhttp.la, libwwwmime.la, and the rest)
> get still built, they're just noinst_LTLIBRARIES, and don't get
> installed. Instead, lib_LTLIBRARIES consists of a single libwww.la,
> which is built by merging all the individual component libraries. So,
> if someone's working on some code outside of the tree that manually
> links to a subset of all those component libraries, that'll continue
> to work.
>
> The Makefile also builds another consolidated target
> libwwwconvenience.la, which is a libtool convenience library.
> libwwwconvenience.la will be very useful to apps that include the
> entire libwww tree into the apps' source tarball bundle, instead of
> requiring an existing libwww install to be made prior to building the
> source (like Amaya).
>
>
Received on Monday, 12 December 2005 19:35:22 UTC