libIDL possible nitpicks

Ken Moffat zarniwhoop at ntlworld.com
Tue Dec 2 16:35:06 PST 2008


On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 03:55:05PM -0800, Nathan Coulson wrote:
> I do not know if there is a reason for this, but I noticed that libIDL
> does not explain the configure options.  (I've noticed a new trend
> that adds --disable-static when updating a package to optional
> instructions, so was just surprised when I saw that there was no
> section for it here).
> 
> I imagine the reason is just because there are no interesting flags to
> mention though.
> 
 No, I just missed adding it.  As far as I can see, the only
required thing is --prefix=/usr which doesn't need to be explained.
Adding the *optional* flag provides its own explanation.  If I've
ever put these options into the configure command itself, that's an
error.

 Some packages only create shared libraries (joy, and only .so in
the explanation), too many need to be told to --disable-static, some
need that combined with --enable-shared, and a few have no obvious
way of not installing the static libs : I don't think I've updated
any of those yet.

ĸen
-- 
das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce



More information about the blfs-dev mailing list