Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <3B1DB7A2.5D6282C2@ece.gatech.edu>
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 00:54:58 -0400
From: Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
CC: Jason Tishler <Jason DOT Tishler AT dothill DOT com>,
        Cygwin Users <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: Re: [avail for test] readline-4.2-1
References: <EA18B9FA0FE4194AA2B4CDB91F73C0EF08F040 AT itdomain002 DOT itdomain DOT net DOT au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


> How autoconfiscated/libtoolised/automade is readline && your patch? I'm
> doing a chunk of work now on libtool and will investigate taking on
> readline...

There are two issues: my current patch, and possible libtool improvements:

1) The patch has several parts: 
   a) changes to .h and .c files: these add the appropriate macros and and
defines so that __declspec(dllimport/dllexport) is used when appropriate
   b) changes to Makefiles (Makefile.in's) for building dll's and including the
-DREADLINE_STATIC define when building/linking the static lib
   c) other misc changes (the stuff in CYGWIN-PATCHES, installing the cygwin
README)

1-a) is necessary and is unaffected by platform.  When building on non-cygwin,
the READLINE_EXPORT() macros are NOPs.
1-b) is not (old) autoconf friendly.  I don't know how to make it so. See 2)
1-c) this stuff should not be submitted back to Chet.  It's inappropriate for
the official readline dist.

My changes are not libtool-based at all.  It seems, too, that readline doesn't
use libtool to build on Linux, either.  It appears that readline is autoconf'ed,
but not libtool'ed.

2) Rumor has it that newer libtools can create dll's.  I have not looked into
this issue at all.  If you pursue this, the Makefiles will probably change
w.r.t. the original in a differet way than I have changed them in 1-b).  Also, I
do not know if libtool can deal with the appropriate #defines and macros as in
1-a).

--Chuck

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple