Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 13:24:11 +0300
From: Paul Sokolovsky <paul-ml AT is DOT lg DOT ua>
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v1.32) S/N AB51B607
Reply-To: Paul Sokolovsky <paul-ml AT is DOT lg DOT ua>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <19558.000830@is.lg.ua>
To: cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Subject: DLL naming conventions
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello cygwin,

  Existance of several GNU targets based on incompatible underlying
libraries brings (or will bring soon) problem of clashes between their
components. Mere installing software build with each of them into
separate directory and setting PATH to one of the in per-session
manner is not flexible since often one piece of software absent in
that or another distribution. Of particular importance here is
clashing of DLLs which is espicially hard to detect for end users. It
would be nice if there were some convention for naming DLLs build for
particular target. Cygwin did that for a some time, for example,
native builds of Tcl/Tk, etc. used to have 'cyg' prefix. However,
latest additions seem not to follow this practise.

  Will it be possible to re-consider this matter and if it applies,
recommend to follow it? More importantly, it can be automatically
supported on appropriate level (in libtool).

--
Paul Sokolovsky, IT Specialist
http://www.brainbench.com/transcript.jsp?pid=11135



--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com