Subject: Re: cygintl.dll missing
From: "Robert Collins" <[email-masked]>
To: "Charles Wilson" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "Corinna Vinschen" <[email-masked]>, <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 08:05:38 +1100

----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Wilson" <[email-masked]>
> Well, the *real* problem here is that gettext-0.10.38-2's cygintl.dll
> exports some symbols that gettext-0.10.35p1-2's cygintl.dll does not.
> Therefore, 38's dll is backward compatibile with apps that use
35p1-2's
> DLL, but 35p1-2 is not *forward* compatible.

It exports the new symbols, but what I wnat to know - why does vim use
them? Are they used in the same #defines that previously used older
symbols?

> I don't know how to solve this problem.  The libtool versioning scheme
> -- as mapped to the windows dll structure -- implies that the version
> number should NOT change when symbols are ADDED to the interface,
right?
...
Yes, and I still think that reasononing is correct. It means that having
the newest .dll on the system will work for all apps linked to that dll
name. Even linux doesn't guarantee forward compatability. (i.e. having
an older library than a program needs won't work. Having a newer one
will work for old binaries).

...
> So, to repeat: this illustrates a problem with gettext (more globally,
> with dll versioning on windows) but I don't know how to solve it.
> Except "update your gettext package". Sigh.

Yup. It's a wonderful world :]. Seriously though, I don't percieve this
as an issue. What I see as an issue is setup.exe not allowing
package-version constraints on dependencies. And thats *my* problem :}.

Rob

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/