[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RFC] w32 and Libtool.
From: |
Simon Josefsson |
Subject: |
Re: [RFC] w32 and Libtool. |
Date: |
Thu, 14 Oct 2010 21:22:08 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) |
Peter Rosin <address@hidden> writes:
>> The first issue (i.e., MSC static builds) could be handled by the means
>> in the second point (i.e., project specifying -DGSASL_API="") though.
>> Then there would be no need for GSASL_STATIC.
>>
>> Anyway, I think the block will likely need to be adapted by each
>> project. I'm not trying to push for my version, just to offer it for
>> comparison.
>
> The only changes that should be needed is visibility attributes (which I
> didn't want to discuss too much in the already complex text) and the
> obvious s/LIBFOO_/LIBBAR_/ change. What other adaptations are needed?
Probably none, but as the visibility attribute change suggests, there
may be other project specific changes.
> BTW, I think it is somewhat ugly to mention HAVE_ defines in installed
> headers, but since they are hidden behind GSASL_BUILDING it's acceptable.
Yes, I agree, but haven't been able to think of a better solution.
Possibly I could add something to config.h when building the project
instead of having this in the public header file...
/Simon
- [RFC] w32 and Libtool., Peter Rosin, 2010/10/13
- Re: [RFC] w32 and Libtool., Vincent Torri, 2010/10/13
- Re: [RFC] w32 and Libtool., Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/10/13
- Re: [RFC] w32 and Libtool., Peter Rosin, 2010/10/13
- Re: [RFC] w32 and Libtool., Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/10/14
- Re: [RFC] w32 and Libtool., Simon Josefsson, 2010/10/14
- Re: [RFC] w32 and Libtool., Peter Rosin, 2010/10/14
- Re: [RFC] w32 and Libtool., Simon Josefsson, 2010/10/14
- Re: [RFC] w32 and Libtool., Peter Rosin, 2010/10/14
- Re: [RFC] w32 and Libtool.,
Simon Josefsson <=
Re: [RFC] w32 and Libtool., Peter Rosin, 2010/10/14