Re: [Patch] skipping import libraries for performance reasons - direct auto-import of dll's

[Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>]

On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 10:20:13PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 01:46:50PM +0100, Ralf Habacker wrote:
>>>3.  ld works more like the linux version.  There are only static
>>>archives and shared libraries which could be linked directly without
>>>the indirection of using import libraries.  This simplifies for example
>>>libtool handling.
>>>
>>
>>I don't see how.  If anything it would complicate libtool handling
>>since libtool would have to know about both import libraries and dlls.
>>You can't just give up on import libraries, if for no other reason than
>>some libraries (like cygwin's for instance) contain a combination of
>>import data and static data.
>
>
>Yep.  I think this is better handled as follows:

Another thing that "would be nice" would be to speed up the handling of
import libraries.  It might not be necessary for ld to be as slow as
it is.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/