> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tomas Restrepo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Well, the easy way out would be to distinguish between those
> libs that usually don't change (such as those provided by MS
> in VS or PSDK), and those you create in your projects which
> might change often. So you could have, perhaps, a
> "dependencies" fileset, besides the usual list of libraries
> to link to. (Of course, you'd add the libs in "dependencies"
> to the linker command line so that they are linked in, too).
> This would be similar to how VS does it, I think...
That's not too bad, I sort of like it. The only drawback is that the
dependency libraries are specified twice, of course.
I find that this wouldn't be a practical problem because I don't think
I've ever specified anything other than a system-like library using a
lib search path. For all of my "user" sorts of libraries, I always
specify the complete path name. For this you could do:
<lib-search-path>
<includes name="/some/system/like/path"/>
</lib-search-path>
<dependent-libraries>
<includes name="/path/to/my/library.lib"/>
</dependent-libraries>
<non-dependent-libraries>
<includes asis="true" name="runtime.lib"/>
</non-dependent-libraries>
Where runtime.lib is some library that isn't likely to change and I
don't need my build to be dependent on it.
For the purposes of building the link.exe command line these 2 sets of
.lib files are treated the same. For the purposes of calculating
NeedsCompiling dependencies, it would just use the <dependent-libraries>
group. It would be an error to have a <dependent-libraries> file that
you couldn't find via it's relative or absolute path. The link task
would not look at <lib-search-path>'s to find those files for purposes
of NeedsCompiling.
The element names here are hideous, you'll probably want to pick better
names.
If you really wanted to have libraries (such as runtime.lib in this
example) treated as dependencies, you'd probably need a separate
<dependencies> (as suggested by Tomas) that just specifies files used as
dependents and are not used in generating the command line. As I said,
in practice I'd never need the <dependencies>, which is a bonus.
Looking back on this, it looks sort of complex, but I can't think of a
simpler way to achieve what we need.
Eric.
_______________________________________________________________
Don't miss the 2002 Sprint PCS Application Developer's Conference
August 25-28 in Las Vegas -
http://devcon.sprintpcs.com/adp/index.cfm?source=osdntextlink
_______________________________________________
Nant-developers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers
