On Thursday 29 November 2012 09:36:33 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > On Thursday 29 November 2012, David Faure wrote: > > On Thursday 29 November 2012 09:08:05 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > > In KDE4 we do it this way because we did it this way in KDE3. ;-) > > > Personally I don't care much whether plugins have a "lib" prefix or not. > > > Not having the "lib" prefix can be interpreted as a hint that this file > > > is not a normal shared library. > > > Technically it shouldn't matter I think. > > > > It's more than a hint, it's a strong guarantee, that nobody will ever > > succeed in linking to a plugin as if it was a shared lib. > > At least it is possible: > ~/src/test/$ g++ main.cpp /usr/lib/audacious/Output/filewriter.so -o test > ~/src/test/$ ldd test > linux-gate.so.1 => (0xffffe000) > /usr/lib/audacious/Output/filewriter.so (0xb76eb000)
Sure. But at least the -lfilewriter syntax will break :-) (Yes, this is about non-cmake users, i.e. people who didn't see the light yet) > Simply changing the default in cmake is probably not possible, since this > would break projects which expect to have the "lib" prefix in their plguins. > > But e.g. by introducing a new cmake policy (e.g. CMP0020: do not set a > prefix for MODULE libraries) this should be possible. > So whoever says > cmake_minimum_required(VERSION 2.8.11) > would automatically get this policy activated, and the modules wouldn't have > the prefix anymore. This is usually acceptable behaviour for cmake since > stating "I need cmake 2.8.11" is interpreted to imply that this users knows > what he is doing and that he explicitely asked for the behaviour as it is > in 2.8.11. I would like that very much. -- David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr Working on KDE, in particular KDE Frameworks 5 _______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
