On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Alvaro Lopez Ortega wrote:
So, I'm wondering what is wrong with it. Is the DLL generation
working? May it be a problem of libtool? Does someone have some
idea of what is failing?
Could be a problem with the libtool you are using. Note that you did
not tell us what ve
Hi all,
I have been working on the Win32 port of Cherokee [1] for the last
few days. The code is compiling ok but I have a little problem with
Automake: It compiles all the libraries statically (only .a files).
I have followed the instructions on the Automake manual: I have
added -no-u
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005, Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
but that doesn't make much sense.
still no: there are people who really do _not_ want "make install"
to create new files (because that's the way they want to do installs).
When they see it doing that, it's
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
but that doesn't make much sense.
still no: there are people who really do _not_ want "make install"
to create new files (because that's the way they want to do installs).
When they see it doing that, it's a bug.
You're welcome to produce code the
On Sun, 11 Sep 2005, Thomas Dickey wrote:
If 'make install' does not depend on all, then it may misbehave since
necessary dependencies may not be built. Regardless of unexpected
side-effects (to the user), it is the technically correct thing to do.
you're confusing expected (conventional) beh
On Sat, 10 Sep 2005, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Sat, 10 Sep 2005, Tom Tromey wrote:
Harald> Please see subject. Of course I would agree that this
Harald> dependency is usually a good thing, but sometimes it might
Harald> be helpfull to do a 'make install' for another prefix e.g.
Harald> in your
