apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject RE: src/ directory (was: Re: apr-util comments)x
Date Mon, 11 Dec 2000 16:34:17 GMT
> From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [mailto:wrowe@rowe-clan.net]
> Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 8:01 AM
> 
> > From: Greg Stein [mailto:gstein@lyra.org]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 7:38 AM
> > 
> > On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 07:26:05AM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > > 
> > > the only way the MSVC 5.0 .dsp files may depend on one another are 
> > > on the same "- Win32 Debug" tag ... only when you get into 6.0 can the dsp
of
> > > "prog - Win32 Debug" model depend on the "lib - Win32 Debug DLL" dsp.  We had
> > > the system set up this way a while back, and already nuked it - wouldn't work.
> > 
> > When you say "prog - Win32 Debug", do you mean Apache for "prog"? e.g. an
> > app's .dsp can only depend upon a .dsp, and it selects the configuration
> > based on what is after the "-" char in both dsps?
> 
> Whatever, yes, Apache is a good example of prog, so is ab, or anything that
> is built on apr.  And yes, the suffix defines the model.

now I remember why it DIDN'T WORK :-(

InstallBin
 + Support binary [- Win32 Static Release]
   + apr-util     [- Win32 Static Release]
     + apr        [- Win32 Static Release]
 + Modules        [- Win32 Dynamic Release]
 + Apache binary  [- Win32 Dynamic Release]
   + Core library [- Win32 Dynamic Release]
     + apr-util   [- Win32 Dynamic Release]
       + apr      [- Win32 Dynamic Release]
 
Now, which model is InstallBin (the installation makefile) - is it Static 
or Dynamic?  This was my chicken and egg problem.  It can't be both, there 
is no way in MSVC 5.0 to dovetail these two build types.

> > In MSVC5, is it possible to change what occurs after the "-"? In other
> > words, could we have "Apache - Win32 Debug DLL" meaning to link against DLLs
> > and "Apache - Win32 Debug Lib" to statically link everything? (e.g. no mixed
> > types unless somebody wants to set up their own DSP files)
> 
> This could be nicer, yes.  But it adds complexity to the apps users create
> based on our package.

Additional observation, MSVC5 is a moron, it treats the project name as 
everything up to the the hyphen, even the hyphen within apr-util - that's 
why the project names and make files for win32 must be aprutil.

> > Gotcha. So if we *were* to combine them, then we'd have four separate sets
> > of object files. Do we have four sets of objects today? (e.g. if you opened
> > both DSPs and compiled both Debug and Release)
> 
> Two, we cheat.  The .lib is built on exported symbols (with the performance
> penalty and exported names).  The .dll just grabs the .lib.  And I did so
> simply to avoid maintaining two sets of file names.
> 
> > My basic motivation here is that the number of DSPs and build targets and
> > outputs has always been a bit confusing to me. I'm seeking a way to simplify
> > / reduce the system.
> 
> You and I both :-)
> 
> My real goal is to create the .dsp's from the makefile.in - Not sure how 
> exactly at this moment, but I'm getting there.

If I start with Jeff Trawick's libtool, this might just be possible :-)


Mime
View raw message