Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Mon, 4 Sep 2000 13:02:26 +0100
From:	"Gary V. Vaughan" <gvv AT techie DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Subject:	Re: DLL naming conventions
Message-ID:	<20000904130226.C7695@demon.co.uk>
References:	<200009011148 DOT OAA23769 AT urkki DOT tellabs DOT fi> <39AFB333 DOT 69CE5F95 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20000902140958 DOT F7695 AT demon DOT co DOT uk> <39B14893 DOT A86AF3F9 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20000902231925 DOT Q7695 AT demon DOT co DOT uk> <20000902221915 DOT B13854 AT cygnus DOT com> <20000903132712 DOT B7695 AT demon DOT co DOT uk> <20000903123018 DOT A22158 AT cygnus DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To:	<20000903123018.A22158@cygnus.com>; from cgf@cygnus.com on Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 12:30:18PM -0400
X-Operating-System:	Linux oranda 2.2.13

On Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 12:30:18PM -0400, Chris Faylor wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 03, 2000 at 01:27:12PM +0100, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
> >
> ><rant>
> >Why not just statically link all of our applications?  Then we
> >wouldn't have any problems with wrong dlls being loaded at all!
> ></rant>
> 
> Are you ranting at me?  Don't bother.

No offence was intended.  I was mostly ranting on the capacity of
Microsoft to remove all the advantages of a system (shared libraries)
but still retain all the loops you have to jump through to use them.

> My major concern was naming every cygwin DLL "cygsomething.dll".  I
> really don't like that idea, especially since it will mean work for
> people at Red Hat to accomodate.

Chuck has talked sense into me here... I no longer think that this
buys us anything.

> I did see the AppPath registry key being mentioned.  I'm not sure how
> libtool could make use of that since that is something that is set on
> installation of a package.  libtool may be out of the picture at that
> point unless you're doing 'make install'.

Bummer =(O|  Does that mean binary packages would need to run a
post-install script to set the AppPath correctly then?  If it was a
boiler plate script, perhaps libtool could generate it if it notices
that the `make install' is moving things to a staging area (for
packaging) as opposed to moving things directly to the live
directories...

> This could be a solution for cygwin but I don't know if it addresses the
> problem of other packages or not.

Paul has shown willing to provide suitable patches for his system, and
I use only cygwin myself.  If I can improve the build system on just
cygwin I will be more than happy.

Cheers,
	Gary.
-- 
  ___              _   ___   __              _         mailto: gvv AT techie DOT com
 / __|__ _ _ ___ _| | / / | / /_ _ _  _ __ _| |_  __ _ ___       gary AT gnu DOT org 
| (_ / _` | '_|// / |/ /| |/ / _` | || / _` | ' \/ _` | _ \
 \___\__,_|_|\_, /|___(_)___/\__,_|\_,_\__, |_||_\__,_|//_/
home page:  /___/                      /___/                  gpg public key:
http://www.oranda.demon.co.uk           http://www.oranda.demon.co.uk/key.asc

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com

- Raw text -