Re: renaming modules to lib*

----- Original Message -----
From: "Henrik Nordstrom" <hno@hem.passagen.se>
To: "Robert Collins" <robert.collins@itdomain.com.au>
Cc: <squid-dev@squid-cache.org>
Sent: Monday, April 02, 2001 5:25 AM
Subject: Re: renaming modules to lib*

> Actually they are not built as libraries, they are built as object
> archives. The whole archive is linked in as an object, not an library.
>
> Same file format, different link syntax.
>
> /Henrik

Ah, path/.a instead of -L path -lname. I thought that made no differenc
to the resulting binary for static links?

The question still remaings for the shared module stuff that I am
targeting down the track (and yes, it's 100% optional - static compiles
will still be the default).

So can I rename them?

>
> Robert Collins wrote:
> >
> > I'm working on the automake sampler for you gurus to have a look
at...
> >
> > One of the good[CanBeAnnoying] things about automake is it points
out
> > inconsistencies:
> >
> > All the modules are currently built as libraries. heap.a, lru.a etc.
> >
> > Accordingly, they should probably be called libheap.a, liblru.a...
> >
> > Any expected issues with this? (I don't expect itto impact users at
> > all - and it will make shared libraries a lot easier later on [some
> > platforms require shared libraries to obey naming formats]).
> >
> > Rob
>
Received on Sun Apr 01 2001 - 15:56:36 MDT