Re: --out-implib when linking shared libraries
I've just built a Haskell dll on Windows. As part of the process it generated an 14Mb foo.dll, and a 40Mb foo.dll.a. Looking at the flags passed to ld I see --out-implib=foo.dll.a. What is the purpose of the .a file? What might it be needed for? Is it possible to suppress it? It looks like what you're getting is an import lib that also contains a full copy of all the code. Yes, that seems likely. My guess is it's just a cat of the .o's, with header tables etc. I think it's possible to have minimal .lib files that do not contain any code and only refer to the corresponding dll. Further, I think recent gnu ld versions can link directly against dlls without using an import lib (though you may still need the import lib if you want to use MSVC to link to your dll). I don't, although having that option wouldn't be a bad thing - having a minimal .lib is perfectly reasonable as a default. Having a massive .lib seems crazy. (The fact that .lib is named .dll.a isn't too much of an issue) So my suggestion is remove it, if you're linking using gcc it should work. I'm not linking the .dll at all, only using dynamic linking, which works without the .lib. But I don't really want to start removing files - doing that in a build system seems like a bad idea. Thanks Neil ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: --out-implib when linking shared libraries
On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 11:07 +0100, Neil Mitchell wrote: I don't, although having that option wouldn't be a bad thing - having a minimal .lib is perfectly reasonable as a default. Having a massive .lib seems crazy. (The fact that .lib is named .dll.a isn't too much of an issue) It's possible to create a minimal import lib via a .def file (which lists the exports). I think the dlltool helps with that. So my suggestion is remove it, if you're linking using gcc it should work. I'm not linking the .dll at all, only using dynamic linking, which works without the .lib. But I don't really want to start removing files - doing that in a build system seems like a bad idea. Sure, so at least you don't have to install them. Duncan ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: --out-implib when linking shared libraries
I remember that the .dll.a libraries that GCC produces are not always compatible with MSVC. Sometimes it works if you rename them to .lib but sometimes it doesn't. It is much more realiable to create .lib from .def file via some of the MS tools. If GCC can link dynamic libraries without using the static library then it might be good idea not to build the import libraries at all. Regards, Krasimir On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Duncan Coutts duncan.cou...@worc.ox.ac.uk wrote: On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 11:07 +0100, Neil Mitchell wrote: I don't, although having that option wouldn't be a bad thing - having a minimal .lib is perfectly reasonable as a default. Having a massive .lib seems crazy. (The fact that .lib is named .dll.a isn't too much of an issue) It's possible to create a minimal import lib via a .def file (which lists the exports). I think the dlltool helps with that. So my suggestion is remove it, if you're linking using gcc it should work. I'm not linking the .dll at all, only using dynamic linking, which works without the .lib. But I don't really want to start removing files - doing that in a build system seems like a bad idea. Sure, so at least you don't have to install them. Duncan ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
possible alternative to libFFI
Hello glasgow-haskell-users, http://www.nongnu.org/cinvoke/faq.html -- Best regards, Bulat mailto:bulat.zigans...@gmail.com ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
Re: possible alternative to libFFI
On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 22:31 +0400, Bulat Ziganshin wrote: Hello glasgow-haskell-users, http://www.nongnu.org/cinvoke/faq.html From the page: How does C/Invoke compare to libFFI? At the C API level they're pretty similar, aside from some minor quibbles. libFFI has been around longer and is much more portable, but the last release was in 1998. Note that there are separate libffi releases again: http://sourceware.org/libffi/ libffi-3.0.8 was released on December 19, 2008. You can ftp it from ftp://sourceware.org/pub/libffi/libffi-3.0.8.tar.gz Duncan ___ Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
