On 12/29/2011 19:51, Peter Meyer wrote: > Hi > > Am 29.12.2011 10:30, schrieb JonY: >> Oh boy, looks like you skipped some manuals. > > Thadt might be true, but i allways struggle to find the correct manuals. > I Google all the time but it is verry > hard for me to find the hardfacts. Of cause, there are lots of > Informations out there, but if you have a specific > question like linking a non standard Linux/Unix Compiler on a special > Windows Versio (Vista) with all the hassle, > its not thadt eas: In my opinion there must be a think like "-lfoo to > link to libfoo.dll.a," and it was. > >> Please at least look at the GNU GCC and LD manual. > It sounds stupid but can you give me a link to the Manual and Books > thadt you are using? > I google a lot but i allways find some basic stuff. On FreeBSD the docs > are a dream, but on Linux sometimes it > depresses me. > >
SeeGNU GCC Manual at <http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/>, likewise for binutils, <http://sourceware.org/binutils/docs-2.22/>. >> Autotools is a shell program to generate configure/makefile.in etc, >> configure in this case is also a shell script. A base install of >> Windows will not have anything to run or interpret the shell script, >> you'll need to install Cygwin, MSYS or Interix. The easiest way to get >> it all in one place is to use Cygwin and its setup program, simply >> pick and choose > > I know Cygwin but the last time i was looking at it, there was no plans > off 64-Bit on Windows and other things simply doesent > work. > I'm using it now, never had any major issues with it. autotools/mingw-w64 is all in there already. >> As for wsock32, it is now relegated to a forwarder DLL to ws2_32.dll, >> it is strange use wsock32 deliberately these days. It might have >> problems with some newer WINSOCK API versions, but I'm not sure of this. > > wsock32.lib was an example, there is no Project where iam using this lib. > >>> Me and Make. Iam very intrested in understanding the GNU Makesystem and >>> it has alot more of cool Features then QMake or >>> MSBuild and its fun to play with it, but for now i only have to know how >>> the MinGW64 Linker must be prepared for finding the >>> libs on Windows in general and in special from within a Makefile. >>> >> I wouldn't say autotools is the perfect solution for everything, but it >> is the very best if you are looking for platform portability, especially >> when you start dealing with shared libraries. > > Iam the Setup Guy and i have no shy to create Setup.exes (now *.msi) > MacOSX DMG's, Redhat RPM's, Debian DEB's and Solaris ICS > Packages as well. On Linux (with KDevelop or Anjunta) Autotools would > my choice, but i must work on Mac, Solaris, Windows and > FreeBSD and i think, if i only use the GCC / G++ then pure Makefiles are > my best Friends, but you are right, i will use GTK's pkg-config > and this was the real Problem i was had. > /off topic rant Most custom Makefiles cannot handle systems that are different from the developer's, requiring manual editing to fix it. This gets very tedious when you keep running into them over and over. Did I mention different authors have different naming conventions and styles? Do you set CFLAGS? COMPLE_FLAGS? OPTIMIZATION_FLAGS? So many combinations, you have to dig through and understand all of it, they may have also done silly things like assuming you are on their platform of choice, like leaving shared libraries partially linked or using "ld" directly. Mac, Solaris and FreeBSD already have a shell interpreter, not sure why you want to use custom Makefiles there. For Windows, please do not use custom Makefiles, ever, it makes your code hard to cross compile, so stop. doing. that. Most custom Makefiles also can't handle out of tree builds, why should I need to pollute my source directory when I can just rm * to clean things? BTW, did you remember handle pkg-config in cross compile scenarios? IMHO, setup.exe files are a curse of Windows software, held over from the Win95 days, they are very opaque, you have no idea what they are doing when you give them admin privileges to "install", are they even doing that? MSI files are slightly better, they have administrative installs. Just use 7z, zip or rar. In conclusion, too many developers think their libs/apps should use only simple Makefiles. Too many released binaries with stupid huge overkill setup.exes that only extracts and installs a few files when a zip will do. There, end of rant.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a complex infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure access to virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy virtual desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI infrastructure costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox
_______________________________________________ Mingw-w64-public mailing list Mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
