[PPL-devel] [PATCH] Add -lpwl to ppllibs.

[Sebastian Pop]

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 13:39, Ralf Wildenhues <ralf.wildenhues at gmx.de> wrote:
> Does libpwl depend on libppl_c or libppl?  If it does, then your

Roberto, could you please confirm that PWL is not dependent on PPL?

> AC_CHECK_LIB test will fail on a system with only static libraries, as
> the -lppl_c -lppl will be listed before -lpwl thus the link will fail
> due to misordering.  '-l' flags generally belong in LIBS not LDFLAGS,
> but in the AC_CHECK_LIB test you would need to ensure that eventual -L
> flags needed to find pwl would be listed in LDFLAGS.
>
> If libpwl does not depend on libppl_c or libppl, then there is one more
> questionable case: the AC_CHECK_LIB is also tried out if ppl is in-tree.
> In that case it may be the case that an out-of-tree pwl is found.  Would
> that be problematic for libpwl?  If not, then the patch is OK.  If yes,
> then the patch is still ok if you do the change I noted below inline.

Roberto, would it be possible to use a version of PWL different than
the version of PPL?  Again, I guess that PWL and PPL are independent.

> Rainer's comment applies, but as the library list was duplicated before
> your patch, I won't require fixing that issue within this patch.  It can
> be done separately, and as it is not release-critical, it can be done in
> Stage 1.

I already reworked the patch to address Rainer's comments.
I will send out an updated patch.  Thanks for your careful review.

Sebastian