This is the mail archive of the
automake@gnu.org
mailing list for the automake project.
Re: Building .so files only.
- From: Tom Howard <tomhoward at users dot sourceforge dot net>
- To: "Schleicher Ralph (LLI)" <ralph dot schleicher at lli dot liebherr dot com>,Stephen Torri <storri at sbcglobal dot net>
- Cc: libtool at gnu dot org, Automake <automake at gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 17:35:09 +1000
- Subject: Re: Building .so files only.
- Organization: RoboCup Soccer Simulator Maintenance Committee
- References: <88EDFC2ED2AAFD458EB5BB708F0397FC0D4E08@llisvmail2.lli.liebherr.i>
- Reply-to: tomhoward at users dot sourceforge dot net
Hi Ralph,
On Friday 29 August 2003 16:53, Schleicher Ralph (LLI) wrote:
> In libtool jargon, ".so file" is a synonym for a shared library.
> This includes all companion files, but their names and number
> depend on libtool's configuration and build options. E.g., HP-UX
> uses .sl instead of .so for the shared library file name extension,
> but libtool users on HP-UX also talk about .so files, so that
> libtool users on other systems don't get confused.
That's my point. My understanding of Stephen problem is that he doesn't want
to build/install the companion files.
On Wednesday 27 August 2003 16:21, Stephen Torri wrote:
> I am trying to build libraries that will act as modules in a program. At
> present when I do a compile its building .la, .so, .so.0.0 and .so.0.0.0
> files. I am looking for advice on how to setup my Makefile.am file so
> that all I get installed is a .so file. Ideas?
So in his situation, patching libtool and using -shared isn't really going to
solve his problem. Correct?
Cheers,
--
Tom Howard