Can't open data file in r14202

[Chris Shoemaker]

On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 10:17:24PM -0400, David Reiser wrote:
> 
> On May 31, 2006, at 7:39 PM, Chris Shoemaker wrote:
> 
> >On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 05:57:22PM -0400, David Reiser wrote:
> >>
> >>On May 31, 2006, at 1:22 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
> >>
> >>>Chris Shoemaker <c.shoemaker at cox.net> writes:
> >>>
> >>>>>Yes, my ltmain.sh has the line.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Any news on this front?  Maybe we should ask some libtool folks for
> >>>>some help.
> >>>
> >>>Are you sure that a shared object is still supposed to be called
> >>>".so" on Mac?  Are you sure this isn't a glib/gmodule bug?
> >>
> >>loadable modules (as opposed to shared libraries) can have any
> >>extension. Apple recommends .bundle, but the world at large seems to
> >>prefer .so.
> >>
> >
> >Yes, and AFAICT, .so has worked for a long time.  We've verified that
> >libtool is correctly building a shared module.  It's just the
> >unconventional .dylib extension that's a problem.  So either:
> >
> >a) new libtools changed the convention (unlikely); or
> >
> >b) something about your setup is causing libtool to name shared
> >modules .dylib; or
> >
> >c) something about our use of libtool is wrong.
> >
> >But I don't know what c) would be, since it's building the correct
> >file, and the extension is something libtool is supposed to hide from
> >us.
> >
> >>The fink folk have some information:
> >>
> >>  http://fink.sourceforge.net/doc/porting/shared.php
> >>
> >>I'm hoping that's enough to answer chris' initial questions
> >>
> >
> >That's a helpful document for understanding how it's _supposed_ to
> >work, but it doesn't tell me what's wrong.
> 
> I started a thread in fink-devel:  http://thread.gmane.org/ 
> gmane.os.macosx.fink.devel/12837/focus=12837
> 
> In addition to the first pointer to the fink docs, there has been  
> some additional info:
> 
> From David Morrision:
> "Another useful fact, not mentioned on that page:  these days, libtool
> and its autoconf friends can automatically name bundles as .so files
> if they are set up properly.  Perhaps Peter O'Gorman can give some
> advice on this."
> 
> So Chris is on the right track, I just have to find the right  
> incantation.
> 
> And from Peter O'Gorman:
> "Gnucash has a whole bunch of libraries that are also loadable modules
> and is one of the reasons that dlcompat got written all those years ago.
> Gnucash-1.8 and 1.9 may differ in this regard though, I do not know.
> 
> 1.8 always uses libltdl or guile to load modules, and guile always uses
> it's own libltdl, libltdl has a hard-coded-at-compile-time idea of what
> the loadable module extension is, and depending on the libtool version,
> that will either be .so or .dylib on darwin. This should not matter if
> the .la files are kept around though, as the .la file has the dlopenable
> name in it.
> 
> gnucash-1.9 probably still uses libltdl to open modules, doesn't it?"

This module is loaded using gmodule.  I don't know if gmodule uses
libltdl.

> 
> But that is a bit strange, because I do have the .la file around.

And what does it contain for dlname= ?

-chris