Hi Vlad,
* Vlad Skvortsov wrote on Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 05:34:04AM CET:
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >* Vlad Skvortsov wrote on Sun, Dec 04, 2005 at 08:01:45AM CET:
> >>
> >>How can I achieve that?
> >
> >You make the other libraries into `convenience archives'. These are
> >documented in both
*sni
Hi,
At least two GNU packages (gettext and libidn) now have parts of their
source code written in C#. Simon Josefsson, author of libidn, suggests
that C# support be added to automake. Let me here present the basic facts
about C# compilation, and a few macros and scripts that are in use in
GNU gett
Simon Josefsson wrote:
> It may be useful to discuss DLL naming. I noted that gettext call the
> generated DLL 'GNU.Gettext.dll'. Should we encourage a 'GNU.'
> prefix? Should we encourage mixed upper/lower case?
This is unrelated to automake. Let's discuss it elsewhere.
> > - Target "clean"
Bruno Haible wrote:
>Implementation | Compiler
>---+-
>pnet | cscc
>mono | mcs
>sscli | csc
On Windows, it's the .NET SDK, and csc is the compiler.
If you're going to add support for C#, you should include its main
source platfor
Bruno Haible wrote:
> Simon Josefsson wrote:
>
>>> - Target "clean" should remove foobar.dll.
>>
>>Adding '-g' make the Mono compiler create files called foo.dll.mdb.
>>So the "clean" target should probably remove them too.
>
>
> I agree. Target "clean" should remove foobar.dll and foobar.dll.m
Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> At least two GNU packages (gettext and libidn) now have parts of their
> source code written in C#. Simon Josefsson, author of libidn, suggests
> that C# support be added to automake. Let me here present the basic facts
> about C# compilation, and
Hi Bruno,
Just a few quick remarks from a glance.
* Bruno Haible wrote on Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 01:02:10PM CET:
>
> The object code generated from C# source code is platform-dependent.
> Although most (or all?) of the file format of C# libraries and executables
> is platform-independent, C# sourc
Hi Ralf,
> > Object code libraries are files with suffix ".dll". They are installed
> > under $prefix/lib.
>
> Is it reasonable to assume that programs will link against these
> libraries, which are
> - not built in the same package as the dll
Yes. Making code available for use by other programs
Hi Bruno,
* Bruno Haible wrote on Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 08:38:43PM CET:
> > > Object code libraries are files with suffix ".dll". They are installed
> > > under $prefix/lib.
> >
> > Is it reasonable to assume that programs will link against these
> > libraries, which are
> > - not built in the same
Bruno Haible wrote:
>>> - Target "install" should install foobar.dll into $(libdir), using
>>>$(INSTALL_DATA).
>>
>>May any post-install action be necessary for the library (on some hosts)?
>
> None that I'm aware of.
Well on windows hosts (and possibly hosts with sscli), there is the
possib
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > So, every object code library and every executable is assigned a
> > so-called "strong name". The strong names of the dependencies are stored
> > by the linker inside every library or executable.
>
> Interesting. Is there an API/command line tool to extract this version?
* Bruno Haible wrote on Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 10:56:04PM CET:
> Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>
> > > > How does the installed program find its libraries?
> > > > How the uninstalled?
> > >
> > > In both cases: through the -L option passed to csharpexec.sh. Inside
> > > csharpexec.sh, for some C# engines,
12 matches
Mail list logo
