delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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 |
Message-ID: | <414EAA70.2090700@kaffe.org> |
Date: | Mon, 20 Sep 2004 12:01:20 +0200 |
From: | Dalibor Topic <robilad AT kaffe DOT org> |
User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040413 Debian/1.6-5 |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
To: | "Gerrit @ cygwin" <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
CC: | "Grzegorz B. Prokopski" <gadek AT debian DOT org> |
Subject: | Cygwin-specific Libtool patches (Was Re: Is cygffi.dll needed for SableVM JVM?) |
References: | <20040906021844 DOT 84591 DOT qmail AT web53304 DOT mail DOT yahoo DOT com> <1095382062 DOT 1234 DOT 164 DOT camel AT gadek DOT homelinux DOT org> <1729140505 DOT 20040917144223 AT familiehaase DOT de> <1095453892 DOT 21655 DOT 265 DOT camel AT glue> <1902690 DOT 20040918145110 AT familiehaase DOT de> |
In-Reply-To: | <1902690.20040918145110@familiehaase.de> |
X-Virus-Scanned: | by AMaViS perl-11 |
X-IsSubscribed: | yes |
Gerrit P. Haase wrote: > It is as is for backward compatibility, new created DLLs don't need > all the stuff with __declspec(import/export), however, some libs still > use it and if you link against one which uses import/export > definitions it may break things when using pass_all. Then there are > still some problems with exporting data, so it may also be needed to > use import/export definitions with DLLs containing data, and then it > would break too. As long as you have libraries which don't use > import/export definitions and since all code is PIC on Windows anyway, > you may safely use pass_all. I was wondering whether you know if there are pending patches from Cygwin developers for GNU Libtool, as they are preparing Libtool 2.0, so it would be nice to have those included, if possible :) The Libtool upstream is very cooperative and responsive to patches in my experience. cheers, dalibor topic -- 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/
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |