Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 20:38:00 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: Binutils , cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: [Patch] skipping import libraries for performance reasons - direct auto-import of dll's Message-ID: <20021126013800.GA14011@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com, binutils AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Mail-Followup-To: Binutils , cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <00fe01c29480$b9453340$cd6407d5 AT BRAMSCHE> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <00fe01c29480$b9453340$cd6407d5@BRAMSCHE> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:46:50PM +0100, Ralf Habacker wrote: >3. ld works more like the linux version. There are only static archives and >shared libraries which could be linked directly without the indirection of using >import libraries. This simplifies for example libtool handling. I don't see how. If anything it would complicate libtool handling since libtool would have to know about both import libraries and dlls. You can't just give up on import libraries, if for no other reason than some libraries (like cygwin's for instance) contain a combination of import data and static data. However, as Chuck mentions that doesn't detract from the merits of the patch. I'm sure that it would still be very useful to a number of people. cgf -- 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/