Potential patch for nALFS

Kevin P. Fleming kpfleming at cox.net
Wed Sep 10 08:57:06 PDT 2003


Neven Has wrote:
> That sounds good to me.  I have no clue about libtool, so the patch
> would be welcome. :)
> 

Don't worry, Neven, libtool itself is a piece of cake. However, like 
many tools, the tool itself is easy to operate, it's the figuring out 
how best to use it that's harder :-)

Since my original posting, I have learned quite a bit more about this 
process, and the patch has also grown somewhat. I have also found that 
many other packages use this same technique to link to the libraries 
they use, so we're not breaking new ground here.

Finally, I don't think it would be possible to easily offer a 
"--with-libtool" configure option in the patch. The libtool-related 
parts are more ingrained now and I also don't think it would be worth 
the hassle. libtool is a part of standard LFS, so we know that 
everyone should have it. In addition, if a user installs libxml2 into 
its normal location (--prefix=/usr), none of the potential 
disadvantages I outlined in my first message will even apply to them.

The libxml2 patch below as has been accepted by libxml2's maintainer, 
but probably won't appear in an official release until 2.6.0. It 
applies cleanly against 2.5.10 as well.

The nALFS patch is fairly well documented in the new LFS patch 
submission format, but if you have any other questions please ask :-)

The patches are:

http://www.backtobasicsmgmt.com/lfs-patches/libxml2-2.5.9-libtool-libs-1.patch
http://www.backtobasicsmgmt.com/lfs-patches/nALFS-1.1.7-libs-3.patch




More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list