[OpenAFS] Re: Failure to build OpenAFS 1.6.1a

[Carson Gaspar]

On 10/9/12 10:23 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:

> Unfortunately, this is to some extent an unavoidable limitation in the way
> that one specifies paths to a compiler.  There isn't any way to portably
> pass in a -L flag that applies only to a specific -l flag but not to any
> other, so if you have multiple libraries that you're linking with at
> different paths, you can create situations where it's actually impossible
> to specify exactly the libraries you want.

Well, there is, ish...

Instead of -L/some/path -lfoo, pass /some/path/foo.so or 
/some/path/foo.a (which one to use would require a config test, and some 
platforms spell ".so" differently). I'm not advocating that we do this, 
mind you - I don't think it's a good idea. Just saying it's _possible_ 
on most platforms.

Of course anything passing in /usr/lib[64] to LDFLAGS is just plain 
horribly broken and needs a bug filed against it. Again, configure could 
strip out stupid things like that, but that's not something I'd 
recommend. I have to remove enough autoconf "help" from packages as it 
is when I compile things on u"anything-that-isn't-linux"ix.

-- 
Carson