Re: Problems with EDE

[Sascha Wilde <wilde@sha-bang.de>]

Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com> wrote:
> Sascha Wilde <wilde@sha-bang.de> writes:
>
>> This path fixes the target issue for me:
>>
>> diff -r a31c0d5082f6 lisp/cedet/ede/proj-shared.el
>> --- a/lisp/cedet/ede/proj-shared.el	Fri Oct 09 15:49:09 2009 +0200
>> +++ b/lisp/cedet/ede/proj-shared.el	Fri Oct 09 21:11:54 2009 +0200
>> @@ -150,7 +150,10 @@
>>    "Return the name of the main target for THIS target."
>>    ;; We need some platform gunk to make the .so change to .sl, or .a,
>>    ;; depending on the platform we are going to compile against.
>> -  (concat "lib" (ede-name this) ".so"))
>> +  (concat "lib" (ede-name this)
>> +	  (if (eq (oref (ede-target-parent this) makefile-type) 'Makefile.am)
>> +	      ".la"
>> +	    ".so")))
>
> Is this generally right, though?  As the comment notes, there may be
> situations where .a is the correct extension, no?

In case of automake/libtool it shouldn't matter as libtool knows the
dirty details of platform specific naming conventions.  You ask for the
meta file .la and get .so .sl .a .dyn or what ever you need.  So I'd
say: my code is portable.

For the case of make projects (the ".so" case in the above code) it's a
different story: there the .so is actually a bold assumption and wrong
on some platforms, but that was the case before my patch, too.  So the
comment only describes an todo.

Actually I would suggest to use libtool even for the ede make project
variant where possible, as trying to get things right for all possible
platforms would mean to duplicate the affords of libtool to great
extends.

sascha
-- 
Sascha Wilde : The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one
             : that heralds new discoveries, is not "Eureka!" (I found
             : it!) but "That's funny ..." -- Isaac Asimov