Re: The Promise of Forth

Aleksej Saushev <asau@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
>anton@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (Anton Ertl) writes:
>> Yes.  It's there in case we want to add libltdl back in.  CVS is not
>> pleasant when you try to add directories that have the name of deleted
>> stuff.
>
>Why do you want to do that?

For the same reason as the first time: If we need a libltdl feature
that's not present in the old versions that everyone has.

>This is clear sign of bad design, Gforth has nothing to do with libltdl
>installation. This is the job of packagers and system builders.

We are also thinking of people who install Gforth from the tarball (or
at least test it that way, such as ourselves).  Having to install
libtool on evey machine that we want to test on is quite
inconventient.

BTW, if the installed libltdl has the needed capabilities, the
configure script semi-automatically selected the installed libltdl
instead of the included one (on the only machine I used where
libtool-2.2.* was installed, it automatically selected the installed
libltdl, on the others it selected the included libltdl).

BTW, if the most recent libltdl (from libtool-2.2.4 at the time of
this writing) does not work on your favourite platform, the libtool
maintainers would probably be happy to read a bug report or receive a
patch from you.

- anton
-- 
M. Anton Ertl  http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
     New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
   EuroForth 2008:
http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/euroforth/ef08.html