[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: C# support for automake
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: C# support for automake |
Date: |
Tue, 6 Dec 2005 13:22:21 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5 |
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > Yes. I think only the strong names of dependencies are hardcoded into
> > .dlls and .exes, not the paths where to find them.
>
> So people rely on installed paths being default-findable by the engine?
Yes. People install all libraries into $prefix/lib.
> Hmm. This sounds like pretty much the same requirements as for Debian's
> libtool (with link_all_deplibs=no) and
> hardcode_direct=no
> hardcode_automatic=no
> hardcode_minus_L=no
> hardcode_shlibpath_var=unsupported (?)
>
> I say sounds, because I still don't like the idea of bringing the
> comparatively huge machinery that is libtool into play just for this
> task.
Me too. I don't see any point in bringing libtool into the game.
> OTOH, for a project that already uses libtool, adding a tag for
> CS would (in CVS libtool) mean only negligible overhead.
It would still cause big user confusion between C# dlls and native code
libraries (.la, .a, .so, .dll).
Bruno
- C# support for automake, Bruno Haible, 2005/12/05
- Re: C# support for automake, Tim Van Holder, 2005/12/05
- Re: C# support for automake, Simon Josefsson, 2005/12/05
- Re: C# support for automake, Ralf Wildenhues, 2005/12/05
- Re: C# support for automake, Bruno Haible, 2005/12/05
- Re: C# support for automake, Jirka Hanika, 2005/12/11
- ax_prog_csc / Re: C# support for automake, Guido Draheim, 2005/12/21
- Re: ax_prog_csc / Re: C# support for automake, Bruno Haible, 2005/12/21
- Re: ax_prog_csc / Re: C# support for automake, Guido Draheim, 2005/12/21
- Re: ax_prog_csc / Re: C# support for automake, Guido Draheim, 2005/12/21
- Re: C# support for automake, Tim Van Holder, 2005/12/05