I am running fedora 28, libtool-2.4.6-24.fc28.x86_64 Not long ago (f27?), I used to be able to debug programs with libtool --mode=execute gdb --args src/foo Now I get: /usr/bin/libtool: line 3123: src/.libs/foo_ltshwrapper: No such file or directory thanks
(In reply to Marc-Andre Lureau from comment #0) > Now I get: > /usr/bin/libtool: line 3123: src/.libs/foo_ltshwrapper: No such file or > directory I can not reproduce in my projects. Can you please provide self-contained small reproducer?
Created attachment 1475834 [details] log Hi Pavel, Sorry I haven't been able to reproduce so far with a small project. And stripping down virt-viewer isn't simple. Do you have a clue by looking at that bash log?
The thing is: + case $file in + func_ltwrapper_script_p src/remote-viewer This should succeed normally, but it falls back to ... + test -f src/remote-viewer + /usr/bin/dd bs=4096 count=1 + func_generated_by_libtool_p + /usr/bin/grep '^# Generated by .*libtool' + func_ltwrapper_executable_p src/remote-viewer .. this ^^^. + func_ltwrapper_exec_suffix= + case $1 in + func_ltwrapper_exec_suffix=.exe + /usr/bin/grep '%%%MAGIC EXE variable%%%' src/remote-viewer.exe + func_ltwrapper_scriptname src/remote-viewer ... what's weird, this succeeds.
I still think this is normally built Linux program, and no cross-compilation or similar is done.
I mean: s/I still think/I still assume/.
(In reply to Pavel Raiskup from comment #3) > The thing is: > > + case $file in > + func_ltwrapper_script_p src/remote-viewer > > This should succeed normally, but it falls back to ... > > + test -f src/remote-viewer > + /usr/bin/dd bs=4096 count=1 > + func_generated_by_libtool_p > + /usr/bin/grep '^# Generated by .*libtool' > + func_ltwrapper_executable_p src/remote-viewer > > .. this ^^^. > > + func_ltwrapper_exec_suffix= > + case $1 in > + func_ltwrapper_exec_suffix=.exe > + /usr/bin/grep '%%%MAGIC EXE variable%%%' src/remote-viewer.exe > + func_ltwrapper_scriptname src/remote-viewer > > ... what's weird, this succeeds. ah ah..., I have .exe files laying around. Deleted them and problem is gone. Obviously, it would be better if libtool didn't look at thoses when doing cross-compilation. thanks
> it would be better if libtool didn't look at thoses when doing cross-compilation. Am I right that you mean when *not* doing cross compilation?
(In reply to Pavel Raiskup from comment #7) > > it would be better if libtool didn't look at thoses when doing cross-compilation. > > Am I right that you mean when *not* doing cross compilation? yep ;)