Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Authentication-Warning:	slinky.cs.nyu.edu: pechtcha owned process doing -bs
Date:	Thu, 10 Jul 2003 15:49:41 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Igor Pechtchanski <pechtcha AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
To:	Brian Ford <ford AT vss DOT fsi DOT com>
cc:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: development under 1.5.0 ?s
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.GSO.4.56.0307101415530.1846@eos>
Message-ID:	<Pine.GSO.4.44.0307101545040.6088-100000@slinky.cs.nyu.edu>
Importance:	Normal
MIME-Version:	1.0

On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, Brian Ford wrote:

> Could Corinna, or someone else knowledgeable, help me clear up some
> issues with respect to development under 1.5.0?  If I should just
> wait for the (forth coming?) posting to cygwin-apps, just say so.
> Thanks.
>
> Is it true that I should not recompile anything under 1.5.0 unless
> all the dlls it uses have been recompiled first under same?  If not all,
> how do I identify the subset?

Anything using a datatype that has changed size from 1.3.22 to 1.5.0 in
its export list is unsafe.  Identifying the exact DLLs will require
looking closely at their export lists (or asking the package maintainers).

> So, 1.5.0 headers are not safe for development, except for dll package
> maintainers recompiling for the above purpose, and for those carefully
> checking from the bottom up?

The rule of thumb is: if you're using a DLL, beware.  Either that, or
recompile the DLL.

> Is it safe to use 1.3.22 headers with a 1.5.0 dll (I think so)?  Obviously
> the converse is not true.

Your statement isn't either.  All the structure sizes/offsets would have
changed, so you can't use older headers with the newer DLL.

> A comprehensive posting about the rules would be greatly beneficial to
> those of us who develop using Cygwin.
> --
> Brian Ford

Basically, until new experimental packages come out, it's better to either
rebuild the DLLs yourself, or to use static libs.  Oh, and code compiled
with 1.5.0 will most likely not run under anything older.
	Igor
-- 
				http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor AT watson DOT ibm DOT com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"I have since come to realize that being between your mentor and his route
to the bathroom is a major career booster."  -- Patrick Naughton


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -