[arch-dev-public] iso release? libtool signoffs
Jan de Groot
jan at jgc.homeip.net
Wed Mar 26 19:32:59 EDT 2008
On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 14:56 -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Andreas Radke <a.radke at arcor.de> wrote:
> > Anyway, what about our iso release? tpowa didn't want to have libtool
> > moved before the release. Because I don't expect another new ISO based
> > on his work in the next days I want to push libtool and related
> > packages to core/extra. I know not all devs have checked their packages
> > for rebuilds or just not replied. All known libtool issues have been
> > fixed. I expect more from hidden depends after a move to core but that
> > wouldn't change if we keep libtool longer in testing.
> > opinions? can i get signoffs for libtool 2.2-2?
> This sounds acceptable to me. If all the major libtool related issues
> have been run into, then I'm cool with it.
> I will give you a signoff tonight when I make sure I'm fully up to
> date and everything is running fine.
> Anyone else?
Only issues I have seen is some packages that come with outdated libtool
included as symlinks that try to run the old libtool commands through
the new libtool. This causes libtool to parse commands completely wrong,
resulting in random X processes being fired when building some packages.
I've seen several of these packages during gnome 2.22 packaging. A
libtoolize --force --copy, followed by the required aclocal, autoconf,
automake steps fixes this issue.
I don't see the above as an issue with libtool, but as an issue with the
sources that distribute libtool as symlinks. In case something fails to
build, re-libtoolizing is your friend.
More information about the arch-dev-public