Re[2]: MSW DLLs support in libtool

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 00:38:48 +0100 Peter Rosin wrote: PR> On 2016-02-12 21:59, Vadim Zeitlin wrote: PR> > Peter Rosin writes: PR> >> On 2016-02-11 00:38, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: PR> >>> It indicates that the build configuration has agreed to supply any PR> >>> additional

Re[2]: MSW DLLs support in libtool

On Sat, 13 Feb 2016 00:38:15 +0100 Peter Rosin wrote: PR> On 2016-02-12 22:12, Vadim Zeitlin wrote: PR> > Several concrete questions in this thread asking for any benefits of the PR> > current libtool behaviour went unanswered, but let me try once again PR> > nevertheless:

Re: Re[2]: MSW DLLs support in libtool

On 2/9/16, Vadim Zeitlin wrote: > On Tue, 9 Feb 2016 18:44:24 -0500 Nick Bowler wrote: > NB> Here's the thing. Libtool is, by default, designed to transparently > NB> support the case where building a shared library is not possible. > > This is, IMO,

Re[2]: MSW DLLs support in libtool

On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:29:40 -0500 Nick Bowler wrote: NB> On 2/10/16, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: NB> > On Wed, 10 Feb 2016, Peter Rosin wrote: NB> >> I agree wholeheartedly with the notion that --disable-static should end NB> >> up in a failure and

Re: Re[2]: MSW DLLs support in libtool

On 2/10/16, Vadim Zeitlin wrote: > On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:29:40 -0500 Nick Bowler wrote: > NB> On 2/10/16, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > NB> > On Wed, 10 Feb 2016, Peter Rosin wrote: > NB> >> I agree wholeheartedly with the notion

Re[2]: MSW DLLs support in libtool

On Wed, 10 Feb 2016 10:02:25 +0100 Peter Rosin wrote: PR> You appear confused (as almost everybody else) about what -no-undefined PR> means to libtool. The confusion stems from(?) the similarly named linker PR> option, --no-undefined, which apparently does what people expect

Re[2]: MSW DLLs support in libtool

On Tue, 9 Feb 2016 18:44:24 -0500 Nick Bowler wrote: NB> On 2/9/16, Vadim Zeitlin wrote: NB> > I'd like to create Windows binaries for my software from Linux, which NB> > includes creating a couple of DLLs and EXEs that use them. This is not too NB>

Re[2]: MSW DLLs support in libtool

On Wed, 10 Feb 2016, Vadim Zeitlin wrote: Sorry but this is just not true for the MSW DLLs. If the libtool user tries to build a DLL, you can safely assume that it will not have undefined symbols. Anything else just doesn't make sense because it would always result in an error. Again, this is

Re[2]: MSW DLLs support in libtool

On Tue, 9 Feb 2016 21:18:42 -0600 (CST) Bob Friesenhahn wrote: BF> On Tue, 9 Feb 2016, Vadim Zeitlin wrote: BF> > BF> > 2. Enabling this option is not enough as you must also painstakingly add BF> > -no-undefined to all LDFLAGS. Why does libtool need to force you