Versioning for DLLs is important. Search the archives for more info; these threads should get you started -- but be prepared for a lot of reading...
http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2000-08/msg01128.html http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2001-03/msg00011.html http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2000-10/msg01275.html http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-xfree/2001-q3/msg00432.html http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual.html#Versioning Also: >> > > [libtool] should >> > > probably name [dll's] after the oldest ``interface'' (see the document >> > > quoted above) that the library fully supports. That is, if you build >> > > a dll using libtool's --version 5:4:3, you would get library2.dll >> >> 5:4:3 is revision 4 of the implementation of interface 5, which >> is backwards compatible with the 3 previous interface definitions >> (i.e. it is safe for applications linked against interfaces 5, 4, 3 >> and 2 to load the 5:4:3 dll at runtime). Libtool translates the >> 5:4:3 into a system specific version number for the soname to help the >> runtime loadee choose the best available library at runtime. As I >> said before, currently this mapping is wrong on Windows, > > ======== Robert's hacked libtool seems to use the "correct" mapping, > below, on windows. > >> and I think >> the correct mapping is to always use the oldest supported interface >> number -- in this case library2.dll -- when generating the soname. >> This is explained fully in the version node of the libtool manual link >> that was quoted earlier in the thread. The upshot of all this is that libraries should follow this naming scheme: static lib: /usr/lib/libfoo.a import lib: /usr/lib/libfoo.dll.a dynamic lib: /usr/bin/cygfoo<VER>.dll or /usr/bin/cygfoo-<VER>.dll --Chuck > I noticed your example had a DLL name of cygcurl-2.dll. The DLLs (and > libs) from the mingw version are named: > 137134 09-25-01 03:21 libcurl.a > 771 09-25-01 03:01 libcurl.def > 140524 09-25-01 03:25 libcurl.dll > 19726 09-25-01 03:25 libcurldll.a > Is there any specific reason to use cygcurl-2.dll instead of > libcurl.dll? If so, could you either explain the reason to me or point > me to a previous discussion of this issue (or both)?
