chicken-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

[Chicken-users] is C_NO_PIC_NO_DLL necessary?


From: Brandon J. Van Every
Subject: [Chicken-users] is C_NO_PIC_NO_DLL necessary?
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:18:46 -0800
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201)

Is C_NO_PIC_NO_DLL really important? It is used for static libraries, and Makefile.am has the following notation:

# we add -DC_NO_PIC_NO_DLL seperately so that chicken-config does not
# use -DC_NO_PIC_NO_DLL ... -DC_NO_PIC_NO_DLL is only for libtool
# compiles

I'm not using libtool, I'm using CMake. Unfortunately CMake has a limitation that I can't set compile flags on a per-file basis, only per-directory. I could make multiple directories for the CMake build, but that's tedious. I'm hoping C_NO_PIC_NO_DLL is possibly vestigial, or there's a cleaner way to deal with it, if it's just libtool's problem. Maybe bracket it with a libtool-specific define or something.


Cheers,
Brandon Van Every





reply via email to

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