Thomas Dickey wrote:
>
> > In my opinion it is prohibitive and stupid
>
> It's equally stupid to .
I think everyone knows that autoreconf is not ready for prime time.
>From someone who gets cranky when working code breaks because
someone thought I shouldn't do things that way, let me s
On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 12:23:34PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> In my opinion it is prohibitive and stupid not to have a libtool release
> that can properly interact with autoconf.
It's equally stupid to release a version of autoconf which cannot properly
interact with released versions of li
David Olofson wrote:
>
> That brings up another interesting point: If impgen was to be compiled
> when installing libtool, wouldn't that result in the same problem? I
> mean, impgen should only build when you're installing libtool for a cross
> compiler - and then you're in that darn cross compil
On Monday 23 September 2002 15:30, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> David Olofson wrote:
> > However, it's still a very bad idea to compile tools as part of the
> > application build process. ;-)
>
> Right, if you want to install implib as part of distributable resource
> when target == some win32 platform (C
Alexandre Duret-Lutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>> "Ralf" == Ralf Corsepius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> Ralf> http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/libtool-patches/2002-January/001659.html
>
> Ralf> .. which seems to indicate that libtool is the culprit.
> Ralf> => There doesn't e
David Olofson wrote:
>
> However, it's still a very bad idea to compile tools as part of the
> application build process. ;-)
>
Right, if you want to install implib as part of distributable resource
when target == some win32 platform (Cygwin, MinGW, MSVC, etc.) fine, but
don't create it in ever
On Monday 23 September 2002 13:00, David Olofson wrote:
> On Friday 20 September 2002 22:31, Guido Draheim wrote:
[...]
> > In
> > fact, we have a set of function names for a given lib - in its
> > symbol table.
>
> In an export table, I would say, as most clean Win32 DLLs don't export
> symbols a
On Friday 20 September 2002 22:31, Guido Draheim wrote:
> David Olofson wrote:
[...]
> > How about building import libs from headers? (You need the headers to
> > compile anyway...)
>
> Ahhm, not quite - some functions are exported only on a case-by-case
> basis, and there are quite some different
Max Bowsher wrote:
>
> Earnie Boyd wrote:
> [ stuff about impgen ]
> > So, why isn't dlltool being used? BTW, dllwrap is deprecated.
> >
> > Current versions of GCC require -shared in the link step to produce the
> > dll. The -dll -mdll switches are deprecated.
>
> One of the things I ran into
Am Mon, 2002-09-23 um 10.49 schrieb Alexandre Duret-Lutz:
> >>> "Ralf" == Ralf Corsepius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> Ralf> http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/libtool-patches/2002-January/001659.html
>
> Ralf> .. which seems to indicate that libtool is the culprit.
> Ralf> => There d
>>> "Ralf" == Ralf Corsepius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
Ralf> http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/libtool-patches/2002-January/001659.html
Ralf> .. which seems to indicate that libtool is the culprit.
Ralf> => There doesn't exist any officially released version of libtool that
Ralf> is usa
11 matches
Mail list logo
