Re: Teaching automake about dll defs

[NightStrike]

On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> * NightStrike wrote on Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 05:09:04PM CEST:
>> >>> Is this possible?  Is there anyone willing to do it?
>> >>
>> >> Addendum:  A big benefit for me (other than many other things) is that
>> >> it lets automake handle figuring out dependencies.  In my example,
>> >> libx.a doesn't depend on x.def, and I don't know how to make it do so.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Ping
>> >
>>
>> x2
>
> From me, the answer is no.  There are lots of other things that are more
> important to a presumably larger user base, that are more portably
> usable in principle, and IIUC you can easily work around the current
> limitation.

Well.. not nicely.  It's kind of ugly, and doesn't do anything about
dependency tracking.

> If somebody else codes it, I might consider it, but even then it'd be
> strictly lower priority than basically all other pending stuff I know
> of, both with and without patches.

Ouch :(

> Sorry,
> Ralf
>