[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [lmi] Upgrading libxml2 and libxslt
From: |
Greg Chicares |
Subject: |
Re: [lmi] Upgrading libxml2 and libxslt |
Date: |
Fri, 15 Jul 2016 21:13:05 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/38.8.0 |
Of course, our messages crossed...
On 2016-07-15 20:19, Vadim Zeitlin wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 18:03:57 +0000 Greg Chicares <address@hidden> wrote:
[...]
> GC> but I still get "No shared library support". I can't understand what
> GC> 'configure' is doing here, but perhaps you can spot the problem easily.
>
> Unfortunately this "configure" is, in spite of its name, a manually
> written script and not something generated by autoconf, so it took me some
> time to understand this but I do indeed see what it is doing now and the
> way to work around the problem above is to do the following:
>
> % export LDSHARED='gcc -shared'
> % export LDSHAREDLIBC=''
Oh, so that's what '-lc' meant.
> % PATH=/MinGW_bin:$PATH ./configure
> % PATH=/MinGW_bin:$PATH make -s
>
> This still produces libz.so.1.2.8 and not the expected libz.dll on output
> however. It looks functional and we could just rename it to libz1.dll and
> use it but we'd lose at least the version information from the
> win32/zlib.rc file which doesn't get linked in this case, so, on balance...
>
> GC> Here is one alternative that seems to work:
> GC>
> GC> /tmp/zlib-1.2.8[0]$make -f win32/Makefile.gcc
>
> ... this still seems to be better. The main drawback here is that it strips
> the library, while I'd prefer to keep the symbols, but this is relatively
> minor.
I think I prefer the './configure && make' approach. AFAICT, it doesn't
strip the library, and I don't think I care about embedding version info.
I guess we'll still need a manual step to create a DLL import library,
but that's okay.
- Re: [lmi] Do we have zlib already?, Greg Chicares, 2016/07/12
- Re: [lmi] Do we have zlib already?, Greg Chicares, 2016/07/12
- [lmi] Upgrading libxml2 and libxslt [Was: Do we have zlib already?], Greg Chicares, 2016/07/13
- Re: [lmi] Upgrading libxml2 and libxslt, Vadim Zeitlin, 2016/07/13
- Re: [lmi] Upgrading libxml2 and libxslt, Greg Chicares, 2016/07/14
- Re: [lmi] Upgrading libxml2 and libxslt, Vadim Zeitlin, 2016/07/14
- Re: [lmi] Upgrading libxml2 and libxslt, Greg Chicares, 2016/07/15
- Re: [lmi] Upgrading libxml2 and libxslt, Vadim Zeitlin, 2016/07/15
- Re: [lmi] Upgrading libxml2 and libxslt,
Greg Chicares <=
- Re: [lmi] Upgrading libxml2 and libxslt, Greg Chicares, 2016/07/17
- [lmi] Building shared zlib [Was: Upgrading libxml2 and libxslt], Greg Chicares, 2016/07/15
- Re: [lmi] Building shared zlib, Vadim Zeitlin, 2016/07/15
- Re: [lmi] Building shared zlib, Greg Chicares, 2016/07/15