I am suggesting exactly what you hope I don't mean. You should read the entire thread on the topic, which starts with:
http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/libtool/2001-December/005881.html Jon > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > stefan > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 10:41 AM > To: Jon Leichter > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: libltdl for MinGW32 and native compilers > > On Tue, 29 Jan 2002, Jon Leichter wrote: > > > Stefan. I have had the same concerns as you. I have brought up a similar > > topic in the past. Even with your patch, DLL_EXPORT is a flawed > macro name. > > I'd suggest the following patch: > > > > #ifdef LIBLTDL_DLL_IMPORT > > # define LT_SCOPE __declspec(dllimport) extern > > #elif defined (LIBLTDL_DLL_EXPORT) > > # define LT_SCOPE __declspec(dllexport) extern > > #endif > > I think using DLL_EXPORT in `ltdl.h' for building the shared library is > ok. It is the usual way for the `libtool' script to produce "PIC" code. > Personally I would not change it. > > > Of course, IMHO, references to DLL_EXPORT in ltmain.sh should also be > > removed. > > I do not see a `DLL_EXPORT' in ltmain.sh (of version 1.4.2). What do you > mean? I do not hope you mean the `-DDLL_EXPORT' which `libtool' uses to > indicate it builds a shared object. This is in my eyes now a accepted way > to produce shared libraries under Windows and is approved to be working > even with bigger projects and complicated inter-dependencies. > > Cheers, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > _______________________________________________ > Libtool mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool _______________________________________________ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool