apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <gst...@lyra.org>
Subject who? (was: Re: Seperate apr compilations)
Date Fri, 12 Jan 2001 10:51:58 GMT
I was a bit confused at first with this one. You may want to discriminate
between gstein and Gregory Nicholls if it comes up...  (yah, by default, I'm
"Greg", but when other gregs enter the fray...).

:-)

[ and no... FirstGreg doesn't appeal :-) ... gstein or gjs is better ]

Cheers,
-g

On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 10:52:42PM -0600, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> I've done a ton of thinking about these issues.
> 
> 1) Once Greg finishes his fine work exporting symbols, we need
>    no def files whatsoever for our dll (or certainly no symbol
>    names, even if we keep them for versioning/descriptions.)
> 
> 2) We should simply build the sources in both static and
>    dynamic models.  My argument against has always been
>    maintanance, and with no more maintance required on .def
>    files, adding a new file in both apr.dsp and libapr.dsp
>    really isn't that bad.
> 
> Greg, and anyone interested, attached is the patch that will
> 'break' the libapr from apr and libaprutil from aprutil.
> This can go in once all the symbols are APR/APU_DECLARE'ed.
> 
> I'll catch with Ryan if you throw :-)  I have some deeper
> issues and bug tracking to get finished on 2.0 so thank you,
> Greg, for picking up on this!
>...

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/

Mime
View raw message