Re: Notes on OSX 10.5.5
Re: Notes on OSX 10.5.5
- Subject: Re: Notes on OSX 10.5.5
- From: Martin Costabel <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 01:33:55 +0200
Jeremy Huddleston wrote:
[]
Again, do you really mean symlinks? I don't think there are any broken
symlinks. If you mean the .la files, then those files are not IN the
OS. They are in the SDK, so they can't be updated by the OS Update.
Plus, those symlinks are completely uselesss anyway. They are only
used through the reference in the *.la files.
Ok, please don't call them symlinks. They're not symlinks, and saying
that makes me scared that we have a more serious problem with symlinks
rather than libtool archives.
Let me give an example that comes up every couple of days, because it
makes builds break:
On 10.5.4 and on 10.5.5, you have the following libXdamage*dylib files:
/usr/X11/lib/libXdamage.1.0.0.dylib -> libXdamage.1.dylib
/usr/X11/lib/libXdamage.1.dylib
/usr/X11/lib/libXdamage.dylib -> libXdamage.1.dylib
The second and third of these are perfectly meaningful, the second being
the real file and also the install_name, the third one being used in
linker flags -lXdamage.
The first symlink is not used by anything else than by glibtool through
a reference in a libXdamage.la file. But the libXdamage.la file in
xcode-3.1 and 3.1.1 does not reference libXdamage.1.0.0.dylib, it
references libXdamage.1.1.0.dylib. Hence the breakage.
How hard would it have been to include in the 10.5.5 softwareupdate an
additional symlink
/usr/X11/lib/libXdamage.1.1.0.dylib -> libXdamage.1.dylib
?
Plus the 3 or 4 others in the same class? Honestly?
--
Martin
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
X11-users mailing list (email@hidden)
This email sent to email@hidden