Subject: Re: mk/gnu-config question/request
To: None <>
From: Joerg Sonnenberger <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 06/12/2005 18:57:02
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 11:35:34AM +0200, Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
> Yes, and it does and it depends on it and it does not solve the
> problem/issue at hand, which is not building shared libraries.  It's one
> thing to replace 'libtool', it's another for and libtool.m4.  If
> the configure script does not contain some parts of an updated libtool.m4 it
> will never detect to build shared libraries and thus will not build them.

The problem here is that some configure scripts have hard-coded magic
for systems with or without shared libraries. One example is sudo.
It builds the exec wrapper if and only if it thinks that the target
supports shared libraries. But since the OS list is hard-coded into
configure (via libtool.m4), it doesn't recognize DragonFly and skips
building it. I have an open PR which patches configure, but that's
not the root of the evil.

That said, I'm not even sure if we actually have to overrun,
but that's not the critical part. Critical is the embedded logic in
configure. Do we want to patch all broken configure scripts which fit
the above pattern?