delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm |
Sender: | cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs> |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com |
Message-ID: | <012401c16a69$579b7240$0200a8c0@lifelesswks> |
From: | "Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au> |
To: | "Charles Wilson" <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>, <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com> |
References: | <20011111032226 DOT GA21492 AT redhat DOT com> <3BEDFD26 DOT 7060806 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> |
Subject: | Re: Move zlib up one level? |
Date: | Sun, 11 Nov 2001 15:28:40 +1100 |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
X-Priority: | 3 |
X-MSMail-Priority: | Normal |
X-Mailer: | Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 |
X-MimeOLE: | Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 |
X-OriginalArrivalTime: | 11 Nov 2001 04:34:35.0844 (UTC) FILETIME=[2AB18840:01C16A6A] |
----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Wilson" <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> To: <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com> Sent: Sunday, November 11, 2001 3:23 PM Subject: Re: Move zlib up one level? > > > Christopher Faylor wrote: > > > Would there be any objections to my moving cinstall's zlib directory to > > the same level as bz2lib, i.e., making it winsup/zlib? > > > > I'd like to use some of its functionality in cygcheck.exe. > > > Yeah, but isn't cygcheck a cygwin1.dll application? That would mean you'd > need to (at least) compile libz.a twice anyway -- once as a cygwin "app" > and once as a native "app", right? I don't see that being a *bad* thing. Having a single source dir is a good thing regardless. > Or can we build that static lib the same way both times (e.g. only build it > once) since *static* libs CAN have unresolved externals (like "printf") and > then trust the linker to "do the right thing" w.r.t. cygcheck and setup? Only if _all_ the defines used are identical . Rob
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |