X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <4F336BB0.3020508@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 07:46:08 +0100
From: marco atzeri <marco DOT atzeri AT gmail DOT com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0) Gecko/20120129 Thunderbird/10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Tcl/tk  dll's
References: <4F32FC8A DOT 4040602 AT gmail DOT com> <1328753679 DOT 2032 DOT 12 DOT camel AT YAAKOV04>
In-Reply-To: <1328753679.2032.12.camel@YAAKOV04>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On 2/9/2012 3:14 AM, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-02-08 at 23:51 +0100, marco atzeri wrote:
>> curiosity, any reason why the tcl/tk  dll's are
>> not using the cyg prefix ?
>
> In fact, there is.  The point of the "cyg" prefix is to avoid possible
> mismatches with MinGW DLLs using the "lib" prefix.  In this case,
> however, forcing a "cyg" prefix with Tcl's unique build system would be
> a lot of work for no gain, since Tcl already has its own way of
> distinguishing between the two (tclXY.dll vs. libtclX.Y.dll).  Note that
> python and R (in Ports) do the same thing for the same reason.
>
> For the record, I did patch Tcl to also recognize the "cyg" prefix for
> those extensions which are built with other build systems.
>
>
> Yaakov
>

Thanks.

I was in fact thinking about the ITP of R starting from your version and 
I was just wondering if I could live with libR.dll or hack it in cygR.dll.
I was waiting the TCL/TK transition for a final check

Specially as the dll's are on a dedicate directory, out of the PATH
         usr/lib/R/lib/libR.dll
         usr/lib/R/lib/libRblas.dll
         usr/lib/R/lib/libRlapack.dll

staying with libR.dll should be fine in any case.

Regards
Marco


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple