apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Marr <gr...@alum.wpi.edu>
Subject Re: src/ directory (was: Re: apr-util comments)x
Date Thu, 07 Dec 2000 14:37:42 GMT
At 03:01 AM 12/07/2000, Greg Stein wrote:
>On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 09:19:07PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> > I'm actually contemplating building both the .lib and .dll as two 
> full compiles.
> > The benefit, when called for, is that users of the .lib won't 
> have dangling
> > exported symbols.  I refused so far because we have two file 
> lists to maintain.
> > I'm thinking about a system to auto-generate the entire .dsp as 
> appropriate,
> > meaning we don't lug around extra cruft.
> >
> > If we build the .lib and .dll forms as seperate, full compiles, 
> then this issue
> > of the nothing file goes away.
>Why are we using two different .dsp files for this? You should be 
>able to
>set up the four types of compiles within the single .dsp:
>1) Release DLL
>2) Debug DLL
>3) Release LIB
>4) Debug LIB
>Aren't the LIB/DLL differences just in the link line? Feed them a 
>bunch of objects and link them as a LIB or as a DLL.

Nope, this is from a LIB dsp:
# TARGTYPE "Win32 (x86) Static Library" 0x0104

and this is from a DLL dsp:
# TARGTYPE "Win32 (x86) Dynamic-Link Library" 0x0102

This tells the build system whether to use LIB32 or LINK32 as the 

Greg Marr
"We thought you were dead."
"I was, but I'm better now." - Sheridan, "The Summoning"

View raw message