This is the mail archive of the cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com mailing list for the Cygwin XFree86 project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: XFree 4.2.1 + fontconfig-2


--- Alexander Gottwald <alexander.gottwald@s1999.tu-chemnitz.de> 
> > Secondly, Cygwin's shared
> > import libraries end in "dll.a" not ".a" [which is the suffix
> > reserved for static import libraries].  I really think we ought
> to
> > differentiate on this.  What if I wanted to distribute a shared
> and
> > static version of my library?  
> 
> Afaik you can either build a X11 library static or shared. 
> 
> imake.rules contains a macro LibraryTargetName which expands to
> libName.a
> and is widely used in the Imakefiles. The change the macro to use
> libName.a for static and libName.dll.a
> 
> #if Concat(SharedLib,libname)
> #define LibraryTargetName(libname) Concat3(lib,libname,.dll.a) 
> #else
> #define LibraryTargetName(libname) Concat3(lib,libname,l.a) 
> #endif
> 
> But I don't know if this is either valid for imake or if it will
> break anything. And when you do a shared and a static version, the
> static version will most likely be name libName.dll.a too. 

Well that doesn't make any sense because on linux it builds shared
libraries with "so" and static libs with ".a".  Also, the way it
builds it makes it possible in my mind.  I make puts shared objects
in $BUILDDIR/ and static into $BUILDDIR/unshared/.  It shouldn't be
too hard to insert the logic necessary to handle archiving the
contents properly.  Also, ld can automatically generate shared import
libraries during linking of the dll, so that might be a possible
route to look at.
 
> > As you know, ld automatically
> > recognizes dll.a suffix and will use that as the shared import
> > library.  I'm not trying to harp, but this was causing me trouble
> > earlier this year.  There are times when it is handy to link in a
> > static manner, allowing you to ship as few seperate files as
> > necessary.  Also, I don't understand the need for keeping import
> > libraries in subdirs.  If my original idea doesn't suite you, why
> not
> > this (if possible):
> 
> This was not the system install but only the global install in the
> build
> tree. 
> 

I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you mean here...

Cheers,
Nicholas

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]