[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Proposed libtool patch for MinGW

From: Bob Friesenhahn
Subject: Re: Proposed libtool patch for MinGW
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 16:30:12 -0500 (CDT)

On Tue, 15 Oct 2002, Charles Wilson wrote:
> quick question: what pattern is used to name the dlls, implibs, and
> statlibs?  (I don't care, I just want to avoid confusion with the cygwin DLL
> names).  On cygwin, we use:
>    cyg<base>-<number>.dll  (where number= 'current' - 'age')
>    lib<base>.dll.a         (import lib)
>    lib<base>.la            (libtool lib)
>    lib<base>.a             (static lib)
> if mingw's names conflict with cygwin's names for the import lib,
> libtool lib, and static lib -- that's ok, since even if both are
> installed on the same system, one assumes that they are in separate
> paths, and a user can control which is picked up during a downstream
> link by using appropriate -L commands.

The MinGW patch uses lib<base>-<number>.dll for DLL naming, otherwise
the naming is the same as Cygwin.

> But, since this patch borrows a lot of cygwin code, I'm concerned about
> conflicts on the DLL name.  (Plus, you *really* don't want mingw libs
> named "cygfoo-1.dll" do you?)

This problem has already been anticipated and addressed.

> maybe just "<various stuff>.dll".  Whatever, I don't really care, and
> don't want to start a flamewar.  Just make sure you don't use
> "cyg<stuff>.dll" by accident.  :-)

The patch looks for an existing Cygwin installation and tries to
overwrite any existing DLL files.  Just kidding. :-)

Bob Friesenhahn

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]