From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:34778) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QLv6I-0004BH-MB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 May 2011 06:32:35 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QLv6H-0007hG-RF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 May 2011 06:32:34 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:59624) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QLv6H-0007hC-KH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 May 2011 06:32:33 -0400 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p4GAWWCq024960 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 06:32:32 -0400 Received: from yakj.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-112-22.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.112.22]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p4GAWT7p014338 for ; Mon, 16 May 2011 06:32:31 -0400 Message-ID: <4DD0FD3C.20707@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 12:32:28 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1305474018-23235-1-git-send-email-alevy@redhat.com> <1305474018-23235-3-git-send-email-alevy@redhat.com> <4DD0CB7A.7050700@redhat.com> <20110516102529.GF27965@playa.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20110516102529.GF27965@playa.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] libcacard: add libcacard.la target List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 05/16/2011 12:25 PM, Alon Levy wrote: > > Note that this requires libtool at build time rather than only for > > maintainers. This is unlike all other software using it. However, > > I believe this is not too bad given that a special make invocation > > is required. > > I was under the impression this was the way to use libtool (I've basically > followed the manual). Is there another way that is better? Without using Autoconf, this is the way. Usually programs that are fully autoconf-iscated will ship a subset of libtool sources in the tarball, build a custom version at configure time, and invoke it from the Makefile via ./libtool. This has the advantage that only the maintainer needs to have libtool installed. OTOH we do not use Autoconf and I think this contributes to 99% of the bad name for Autoconf, so it's not something we want. Paolo