Farid Zaripov wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 9:36 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RE: Cygwin cannot find -lstd12d
Farid Zaripov wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 6:29 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RE: Cygwin cannot find -lstd12d
I have one fundamental issue with this new patch and that is
the introduction of the OSNAME variable and platform-specific
code into the makefiles. The reason why the OSNAME variable
isn't already there is because the makefiles are designed to
be platform-agnostic and as general as possible. So I would
like to try to find a way to express what we need to do using
a general-purpose mechanism (including introducing new
variable if necessary).
I found that ld can link to shared library without the import library
(but the extension of the shared library should be .dll or .dll.a).
So we can leave the GNUmakefile.lib and GNUmakefile as is.
Okay, good. I'll wait for a new patch then.
What else can be improved: the ld on Cygwin appends .exe
suffix to
the built executable name if that name is not contain '.'.
As a result
we have the /examples and /bin executables with .exe suffix, and
/tests executables without that suffix.
As was noted yesterday, the periods in file names are the
(likely) cause of some problems. Is the missing .exe suffix a
problem when invoking the executables or are you simply
pointing out an inconsistency between the tests and the rest
of our executables?
No problems with invoking, just the inconsistency.
Good. I agree it would be nice for the names to be consistent.
Could you create a low severity issue and copy your analysis
into it in case someone ever wonders why they're inconsistent?
Martin
