On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 09:19:07PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> I'm actually contemplating building both the .lib and .dll as two full compiles.
> The benefit, when called for, is that users of the .lib won't have dangling
> exported symbols. I refused so far because we have two file lists to maintain.
> I'm thinking about a system to auto-generate the entire .dsp as appropriate,
> meaning we don't lug around extra cruft.
>
> If we build the .lib and .dll forms as seperate, full compiles, then this issue
> of the nothing file goes away.
Why are we using two different .dsp files for this? You should be able to
set up the four types of compiles within the single .dsp:
1) Release DLL 2) Debug DLL 3) Release LIB 4) Debug LIB
Aren't the LIB/DLL differences just in the link line? Feed them a bunch of objects and link them as a LIB or as a DLL.
Nope, this is from a LIB dsp: # TARGTYPE "Win32 (x86) Static Library" 0x0104
and this is from a DLL dsp: # TARGTYPE "Win32 (x86) Dynamic-Link Library" 0x0102
This tells the build system whether to use LIB32 or LINK32 as the command.
-- Greg Marr [EMAIL PROTECTED] "We thought you were dead." "I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"
