From: Ted Stresen-R. <ted...@ma...> - 2003-07-31 15:56:10
|
My experience on OS X has been that you need the latest version of the =20= auto* tools if you want to build dynamic shared libraries. In fact, =20 there is a version of the automake file that comes on Mac OS X (Jaguar) =20= that has been specially tuned by Apple and that they recommend you use =20= when building UNIX software on OS X. Specifically, they state: --- start quote --- If Autoconf fails because it doesn=92t understand the architecture, try =20= replacing the project=92s config.sub and config.guess files with those =20= available in /usr/share/automake-1.6. If you are distributing =20 applications that use Autoconf, you should include an up-to-date =20 version of config.sub and config.guess so that Mac OS X users don=92t =20= have to do anything to get your project to build. You may also need to run /usr/bin/autoconf on your project before it =20 works. Mac OS X includes Autoconf in the BSD tools package. Beyond =20 these basics, if the project does not build, you may need to modify =20 your makefile according to some of the tips provided in the following =20= sections. =46rom that point, more extensive refactoring may be required. Some programs may use Autoconf macros that are not supported by the =20 version of Autoconf that shipped with Mac OS X. Autoconf changes =20 periodically, so you may actually need to get a new version of Autoconf =20= if you need to build the very latest sources for some projects. In =20 general, most projects include a pre-built configure script with =20 releases, so this is usually only necessary if you are building an open =20= source project using sources obtained from CVS or from a daily source =20= snapshot. ( =20 http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Porting/Conceptual/=20 PortingUnix/compiling/chapter_4_section_3.html ) --- end quote --- I'm fairly certain htdig will build with dynamic shared libraries and =20= without error on OS X if you run version 1.5 of GNU libtool on it =20 first. Here's a link to an email from Peter O'Gorman (one of the =20 developers for libtool who focuses on Mac OS X) in which he points to =20= one of the typical problems of building on OS X and suggests a =20 workaround, of sorts. http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=3D5113486 As I said in a prior email. I'm doing everything I can to learn about =20= the auto* tools, how they work, and how they work on OS X. This email =20= indicates how far I've gotten (not very...) and hopefully, those with =20= more background can make sense of the data provided here... Best of luck. Off until mid-august on vacation. Yeah! Ted Stresen-Reuter On Wednesday, July 30, 2003, at 11:42 AM, Gilles Detillieux wrote: > According to Jim Cole: >> Hi - As someone already mentioned with regard to their Red Hat =20 >> install, >> the configuration changes to the 3.2 code base require auto* tools =20= >> more >> recent than those provided with the distribution. The same is true = for >> OS X, which currently provides autoconf 2.52 and automake 1.6.1. It >> looks like the minimum requirements are currently autoconf 2.54 and >> automake 1.7. >> >> For the time being at least, I am unable to fully test the changes. = It >> appears that the required version of automake is even ahead of what = is >> available via fink, so it would have to be installed manually. Not to >> say that installing it manually is any great chore, but I do wonder = if >> we are getting ahead of ourselves here. If upgrading auto* tools is >> going to become a prerequisite for the typical ht://Dig install, that >> is probably a bad thing. >> >> Are the relevant enhancements only available via the newer auto* =20 >> tools? > > I don't know if it's still the case now, but in the past the auto* > tools were only needed when you needed to develop/update the = Makefiles, > and weren't needed just to compile the code. Now I think that with = the > snapshots, the modtimes of the files aren't always set correctly so =20= > make > thinks it needs to rerun some of the auto* tools. > > If things are set up correctly, you should normally be able to compile > and install an htdig distribution without using the auto* tools, = unless > the packaged Makefiles don't work on your system. It may be, though, =20= > that > with the new auto* tools the Makefiles end up being more system =20 > dependent > than in the past. > > Can anyone with more automake/autoconf experience comment on the > feasibility of this? It would be nice if installation of ht://Dig > continued not to require the auto* tools. > > --=20 > Gilles R. Detillieux E-mail: <gr...@sc...> > Spinal Cord Research Centre WWW: = http://www.scrc.umanitoba.ca/ > Dept. Physiology, U. of Manitoba Winnipeg, MB R3E 3J7 (Canada) > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including > Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. > Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. > http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/=20 > direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01 > _______________________________________________ > ht://Dig Developer mailing list: > htd...@li... > List information (subscribe/unsubscribe, etc.) > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/htdig-dev > |