GNU bug report logs - #14709
NetBSD: ld option -l:bar.so and libtool (_LT_CHECK_MAGIC_METHOD is not pass_all)

Previous Next

Package: libtool;

Reported by: Anthony Mallet <anthony.mallet <at> laas.fr>

Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 18:10:02 UTC

Severity: normal

To reply to this bug, email your comments to 14709 AT debbugs.gnu.org.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox


Report forwarded to bug-libtool <at> gnu.org:
bug#14709; Package libtool. (Mon, 24 Jun 2013 18:10:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Anthony Mallet <anthony.mallet <at> laas.fr>:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to bug-libtool <at> gnu.org. (Mon, 24 Jun 2013 18:10:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Anthony Mallet <anthony.mallet <at> laas.fr>
To: bug-libtool <at> gnu.org
Subject: NetBSD: ld option -l:bar.so and libtool (_LT_CHECK_MAGIC_METHOD is
 not pass_all)
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 19:36:11 +0200
Hi,

To make a long story short, I want to link a shared library on NetBSD (6.0.1
and -current, on amd64 && i386 for that matter), using gcc-4.5.3, ld-2.21.1 and
libtool-2.4.2.

% uname -sm
NetBSD amd64
% libtool --mode=link gcc -rpath /foo -o libfoo.la -l:bar.so
[bla bla]
*** Warning: linker path does not have real file for library -l:bar.so.
[bla bla]
libtool: link: gcc -shared      -Wl,-soname -Wl,libfoo.so.0 -o .libs/libfoo.so.0.0.0
[bla bla]

libtool is dropping my -l:bar.so because it can't find a file named ':bar.so'
(with a leading colon, no matter if bar.so exists or not), but ld supports the
special -l:bar.so, so clearly libtool is misbehaving here.

I found that the problem resides indirectly in this bit of code in libtool.m4
(summarized):
# _LT_CHECK_MAGIC_METHOD
# ----------------------
# how to check for library dependencies
netbsd* | netbsdelf*-gnu)
  lt_cv_deplibs_check_method='match_pattern /lib[[^/]]+(\.so\.[[0-9]]+\.[[0-9]]+|_pic\.a)$'

I would like to see lt_cv_deplibs_check_method set to "pass_all" here. But I'm
not sure if this can raise unexpected side effects or what should be checked
exactly in order to know if it is correct to set "pass_all" here.

Or maybe would you have another suggestion for fixing the issue?
Thanks in advance for any hint,

Anthony




This bug report was last modified 12 years and 3 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.