Richard/Nicola, See below...
--- Richard Frith-Macdonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 2005-03-21 23:32:53 +0000 Nicola Pero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Unfortunately Windows (and other platforms I think) requires all symbols > > in a bundle to be resolved when the bundle is linked. So having the > > bundle depend on symbols in the application which is supposed to be > > loading them is not a particularly good way of helping the building > > process. > > I think perhaps you have been concentrating a bit too much on windows ... if > you take a mental step back and think about what bundles are for, I think > you will see that this is a case where windows and the build system need to > be made to accomodate bundle usage rather than the other way round. Excellent point, I agree with this. I believe that I too need to take a step back from this issue. > Bundles are used to provide plugin features for applications and libraries > ... so it's only reasonable for them to use the symbols of the application > they are going to be plugged in to. This is what I was trying to say when I mentioned (in previous messages) that other GNUstep apps may be taking advantage of weak symbols, Gorm is probably not the only one and, even if it is, I believe it's usage of them is correct. > Forcing the developer to put anything a > bundle might need in an externals library might get cleaner code, but would > be a burden on them. Also it would mean that you have to provide that > external library for them to link against, rather than providing just the > header file detailing the API the bundle may use in the application, and the > application binary itself. This is quite true. I've been experimenting with some changes, as I said I would previously. Basically you would have to put almost the entire application into a library/framework in order to make this work, which is, in my opinion, not correct. > > I suppose I could try to hack the building system to have the > > application's symbols exported etc ... (did I remember correctly that > > someone did an attempt at that already ?) > > That sounds like the right thing to do. I agree. While I don't deny Gorm could use some reorganization of it's files and makefiles, I believe that a change to the make system to handle this in the general case is the best solution to this problem. I thank Nicola for making the changes to Gorm's makefiles to allow Gorm to work on Windows, but I believe that, for the sake of any other apps which may be using weak symbols, that this needs to be corrected in gnustep-make. I will leave Nicola's changes in, for the time being, until a fix to gnustep-make is made. Regards, GJC Gregory John Casamento -- CEO/President Open Logic Corp. (A MD Corp.) ## Maintainer of Gorm (IB Equiv.) for GNUstep. _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
