On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 9:44 PM, Pete Batard <p...@akeo.ie> wrote: > On 2012.06.17 14:00, Xiaofan Chen wrote: >>>> In any case, the modification is benign and will work >>>> with different version of dlltool, so I think it is good >>>> to change libusb-1.0.def. > > I'm still on the fence there. > > I'd rather wait a few weeks and see if dlltool are going to fix this, as > there may exist cases where people will want to rename the DLL in their > build process, and thus rely on the expected default. I doubt we're the > only project around that uses a bare "LIBRARY" statement, so they > probably want to address that issue. > > If nothing has happened in a couple of weeks, I'll apply the patch.
I am okay with this. I believe the released version is okay, only the development version has this regression. Now that Kai probably realized this is a regression and I think he or others should be able to fix pretty soon. -- Xiaofan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
