Delivered-To: listarch-cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 1999 20:35:21 +0200
From: Paul Sokolovsky <paul-ml AT is DOT lg DOT ua>
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.00 Christmas Preview) UNREG
Reply-To: Paul Sokoilovsky <paul-ml AT is DOT lg DOT ua>
Message-ID: <13857.990213@is.lg.ua>
To: Mumit Khan <khan AT xraylith DOT wisc DOT EDU>, DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
CC: cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Subject: Re[2]: ld, dlls, and windows libraries
References: <199902131802 DOT MAA20124 AT modi DOT xraylith DOT wisc DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello Mumit,

Mumit Khan <khan AT xraylith DOT wisc DOT EDU> wrote:

MK> DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> writes:
>> It's in our master sources, it's all a matter of when we do the next
>> full beta.  I'm not sure about the "--export-all" part; you may need
>> to do "-Wl,--export-all" as that's a linker-specific option.  Unless
>> someone wants to get it into egcs (hint).

[]

>> It's *supposed* to only export non-static functions, not non-static
>> data.

   But what about data? There's really LOT of libraries which use data
interface in API (most GNU libs do that too - just count: readline,
bfd...). It would be very nice if they can be seamlessly (without
changing source, adding defs, etc.) compiled as dll (and has correct
implib, too).

  What we have now:

Dlltool can automatically make .def file from objects which are
supposed to go to dll, but that def has no DATA keyword for data, so
all by default treated as code, which in result give incorrect imlib.

  What is going to be when DJ's work's out:

Ignoring data at all.


  But what I argue is that it's possible on object file level to
distinguish data and code and to produce correct implibs
automatically - just because COFF symbol has code/data attribute (not
counting that it may be inferred from the section symbol in).

  I'm sorry if I make incoreect implications and/or there're other
factors which make described impossible. I'd appreciate if you could
explain this or point to information about.

MK> Regards,
MK> Mumit



Best regards,
 Paul                            mailto:paul-ml AT is DOT lg DOT ua