no more gif problem + nice surprise

[Maksim Lin]

Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> 
> On Apr 18, 1999, Maksim Lin <maksim at swin.edu.au> wrote:
> 
> > Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> 
> >> Kaffe's configure script looks for both libgif and libungif, and links
> >> with both of them.  I'm not sure this is right, though; we should
> >> probably not look for one of them if we find the other.  But I don't
> >> know which one is to be preferred, does anybody?
> 
> > No I meant both versions 3 & 4 of _only_ libungif, here's what I mean:
> 
> The problem is that
> 
> /usr/lib/libgif.so -> libgif.so.3 -> libgif.so.3.0.0 -> libungif.so.3.0.0

Doah ! (me smacks head!) of course thats it.  You're exactly right.

Thanks,
Maksim.

> The SONAME (i.e., the name ld.so will look for) of libgif.so is
> libungif.so.3, and Kaffe *will* link with -lgif even if it does not
> meet its needs.  We should probably drop the search for libgif from
> configure.in, and search for some libungif function that's *not*
> available in version 3, so that we don't use -lungif unless we know
> it's the appropriate version.  Then we'll be able to drop the
> header-file-check hack, which we can't always trust anyway.  If
> there's no new function in libungif.so.4, we could perform the
> header-file check and, only if it succeeds, look for libungif.
> --
> Alexandre Oliva http://www.dcc.unicamp.br/~oliva IC-Unicamp, Brasil
> {oliva,Alexandre.Oliva}@dcc.unicamp.br  aoliva@{acm.org,computer.org}
> oliva@{gnu.org,kaffe.org,{egcs,sourceware}.cygnus.com,samba.org}
> *** E-mail about software projects will be forwarded to mailing lists

-- 
Remember Darwin; building a better mousetrap merely results in smarter
mice.