[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: cygwin/mingw: do not lie about hardcoding

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: cygwin/mingw: do not lie about hardcoding
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 14:25:27 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-09-01)

Hello Eric,

* Eric Blake wrote on Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 02:07:54PM CEST:
> According to Ralf Wildenhues on 9/5/2006 11:46 PM:
> > 
> > The w32 support in Libtool currently lies about their hardcoding
> > capabilities by setting hardcode_libdir_flag_spec to a nonempty value.

> > More generally, the search order is:

> But that is the search order for native windows .dlls and LoadModule.

True.  I assumed so far that would hold for all w32 platforms.

> Cygwin dlopen(), on the other hand, strives for Linux compatibility, and
> has tricks up its sleeve to override the Windows default search path with
> one that is more similar to Linux shared library lookup.  So I'm not sure
> whether this TODO is mingw only, instead of cygwin/mingw.

So, then the question is where is the Cygwin semantics documented (for
both the link editor's behavior, as well as the runtime linker's) and
does it have a form of hardcoding as well?  And if yes, why are we not
using it?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]