Re: libfl.a -> libfl.so?

[David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 06:52:47PM +0100, Thomas Klausner wrote:
 > When linking a shared library with libtool against libfl.a it
 > complains:
 > 
 > *** Warning: linker path does not have real file for library -lfl.
 > *** I have the capability to make that library automatically link in when
 > *** you link to this library.  But I can only do this if you have a
 > *** shared version of the library, which you do not appear to have
 > *** because I did check the linker path looking for a file starting
 > *** with libfl and none of the candidates passed a file format test
 > *** using a regex pattern. Last file checked: /usr/lib/libfl.a
 > 
 > Is there a reason we don't provide a libfl.so?

It is tiny and trivial.

My vote would be to make libtool less stupid...

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost