Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > Yes. I think only the strong names of dependencies are hardcoded into > > .dlls and .exes, not the paths where to find them. > > So people rely on installed paths being default-findable by the engine?
Yes. People install all libraries into $prefix/lib. > Hmm. This sounds like pretty much the same requirements as for Debian's > libtool (with link_all_deplibs=no) and > hardcode_direct=no > hardcode_automatic=no > hardcode_minus_L=no > hardcode_shlibpath_var=unsupported (?) > > I say sounds, because I still don't like the idea of bringing the > comparatively huge machinery that is libtool into play just for this > task. Me too. I don't see any point in bringing libtool into the game. > OTOH, for a project that already uses libtool, adding a tag for > CS would (in CVS libtool) mean only negligible overhead. It would still cause big user confusion between C# dlls and native code libraries (.la, .a, .so, .dll). Bruno
