On 03/02/18 17:23, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 02:59:02PM +0000, Mironov, Mikhail wrote:
>>> On 1/3/2018 7:53 PM, Sean McGovern wrote:
>>>> 2 things:
>>>>
>>>> - does this actually depend on dlopen directly, or should it be libdl,
>>>> like the entries below it?
>>>
>>> If this is Windows only as the doxy states, then LoadLibrary should be the
>>> only dep. But otherwise you're right, it should be libdl and not dlopen.
>>
>> We plan to add Linux support so eventually libdl will be needed. For now I 
>> am OK with either solution.
> 
> If this is Windows-only (for now at least), then there is no need for all the
> ifdeffery. We can add complexity if and when it is needed, no need to clutter
> the code for an uncertain and possibly distant future.

On 04/02/18 14:08, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> Do we have coverage for this on FATE?

This is why the vestigial libdl etc. support is useful - given the headers on 
Linux, it's just another external library you can build anywhere.

- Mark
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
libav-devel@libav.org
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to