Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Hi Vlad,
* Vlad Skvortsov wrote on Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 06:02:21AM CET:
And another question: I have a third-party library that I link my
project against. That one is declared (by its author) to be shared.
However, when I build that, I always end up with all both sha
It sounds like you want to use MinGW (http://www.mingw.org/) rather
than Cygwin. When used in conjunction with the MSYS shell
environment, MinGW allows building normal WIN32 applications with no
dependence on anything but standard WIN32 DLLs.
Bob
On Fri, 9 Dec 2005, BRM wrote:
I want to be
I want to be able to run the AutoTool chain natively
under Windows. I did some looking around, and
everyone´s answer primarily seems to be ¨run Cygwin¨.
Unfortunately, Cygwin is not an option for me as I
can´t tell my clients to install Cygwin to use my
product. (They´d go to someone else.) Same ap
Hello Brendan,
On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 04:18:10PM -0500, Jacobs, Brendan D. wrote:
> We'd like to be able to do "make test" and
> "make release", and have automake just make the make release libraries
> and programs versus using test programs, respectively. Is there any
> support for user-specifi
Hello Thomas,
On Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 04:25:42PM +0100, Roesner Thomas wrote:
> The point is, that I want to build all programs with shared libraries,
> but one with static libraries, wich are based on the same sourcecode
> than the shared libraries. Adding "myprog_LDFLAGS = -all-static" does
> no
I'm working w/ a software development group. We've been using automake
for the past year, and it's worked quite well for us. However, we're
coming up to a release in the next few months, and we're realizing that
it would be very nice to have user targets for test/debug builds vs.
release/productio
Dear all,
i`m looking for your advise for linking against static libraries.
We are using automake/Libtool to build some programs (~30). We have
nearly the same number of lt-libraries.
The point is, that I want to build all programs with shared libraries,
but one with static libraries, wich are ba
Hello,
On Thu, 8 Dec 2005, Mike Mattie wrote:
> The _SOURCES variable makes a poor assumption, that the .c files
> listed are translation units. It is permissable though uncommon to
> create .c files that are included into a translation unit to break up
> a source file for organizational purposes.
* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 04:28:21AM CET:
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2005, Mike Mattie wrote:
> >
> >The _SOURCES variable makes a poor assumption, that the .c files
> >listed are translation units.
>
> A work-around is that you can rename your included .c files to use the
> extension
Hi Mike,
* Mike Mattie wrote on Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 01:02:47AM CET:
>
> if the automake variable _DEPENDANCIES is provided to indicate files
> the target is dependant upon why are they not included in the
> distributed files list ?
Because the dependencies may be created files? Often they are
Hi Mike,
* Mike Mattie wrote on Fri, Dec 09, 2005 at 12:59:33AM CET:
>
> In a recent project I noticed that the individual compilation units do
> not include AM_CFLAGS in the invocation of the compiler, however
> when the program is constructed in the linking phase the AM_CFLAGS
> variable is use
11 matches
Mail list logo
