[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: problem: multiple definitions
From: |
Jens Krüger |
Subject: |
Re: problem: multiple definitions |
Date: |
Thu, 12 Apr 2001 09:19:49 +0200 |
I had the same problem, when I used the LDFLAGS in Makefile.am
Running automake I get the same mystrious message.
src/foo/Makefile.am:6: LDFLAGS multiply defined in condition TRUE
LDFLAGS (User, where = 6) =
{
TRUE => -export-dynamic
}
I found a solution by adding the library or program name to the LDFLAGS the
message vanished.
lib_LTLIBRARIES = libfoo.la
LDFLAGS = -export-dynamic
has to change to
lib_LTLIBRARIES = libfoo.la
libfoo_la_LDFLAGS = -export-dynamic
Regards
Jens
Am Mit, 11 Apr 2001 schrieb Akim Demaille:
Akim Demaille> >>>>> "Robert" == Robert Collins <address@hidden> writes:
Akim Demaille>
Akim Demaille> Robert> 2) snmplib/Makefile.am:14: DEFS multiply defined in
condition
Akim Demaille> Robert> TRUE DEFS (User, where = 14) = {
Akim Demaille> >>
Akim Demaille> Robert> TRUE => -DSQUID_SNMP=1 }
Akim Demaille>
Akim Demaille> >> Hm... I'll look into this one. The idea is that somehow we
must
Akim Demaille> >> be able to tell Automake `look, this is an Automake variable,
but
Akim Demaille> >> the user is allowed to override it'. Currently it's probably
too
Akim Demaille> >> strict.
Akim Demaille>
Akim Demaille> Robert> Any extra details needed - let me know.
Akim Demaille>
Akim Demaille> I think that what I said does not apply, and does match with the
Akim Demaille> actual error you face. Could you grep for DEFS in your
Makefile.am?
Akim Demaille> Thanks!
--
Jens Krüger
Tel: + 49 89 289 14 716
mailto:address@hidden
http://www.physik.tu-muenchen.de
- problem: uninstall-am in makefile with no install targets and non-GNU make., Robert Collins, 2001/04/11
- Re: problem: uninstall-am in makefile with no install targets and non-GNU make., Akim Demaille, 2001/04/11
- Re: problem: unitialized +=, Akim Demaille, 2001/04/11
- Re: problem: unitialized +=, Akim Demaille, 2001/04/17
- Re: problem: unitialized +=, Akim Demaille, 2001/04/17
- Re: problem: unitialized +=, Alexandre Oliva, 2001/04/17
- Re: problem: unitialized +=, Akim Demaille, 2001/04/18
- Re: problem: unitialized +=, Alexandre Oliva, 2001/04/18
- Re: problem: unitialized +=, Akim Demaille, 2001/04/18
- Re: problem: unitialized +=, Robert Collins, 2001/04/18