Re: Makedll.rules.in: Explicitly specify DLL name when building importlib

[Alexandre Julliard]

Jacek Caban <jacek(a)codeweavers.com> writes:
> ---
>  dlls/Makedll.rules.in | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Why do you need this?

-- 
Alexandre Julliard
julliard(a)winehq.org

Makedll.rules.in: Explicitly specify DLL name when building importlib

[Jacek Caban]

On 01/30/13 20:09, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Jacek Caban <jacek(a)codeweavers.com> writes:
> > ---
> >  dlls/Makedll.rules.in | 6 +++---
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > Why do you need this?

My use case is not really valid as is for Wine. I was experimenting with
running parts of Wine on Windows, but I needed to change some DLL names.
With this patch it's as easy as changing MODULE in Makefile.in files and
copying .spec file. This way I get renamed DLLs built correctly and
other DLLs depending on the new name without touching anything else.

The above is not really a reason to put it in Wine. However, I thought
that this behaviour is logical consequence of having MODULE and
IMPORTLIB separately in Makefiles (as opposed to, say, IMPORTLIB=1 and
using MODULE for its name), so I sent the patch.

Jacek

Makedll.rules.in: Explicitly specify DLL name when building importlib

[Alexandre Julliard]

Jacek Caban <jacek(a)codeweavers.com> writes:
> The above is not really a reason to put it in Wine. However, I thought
> that this behaviour is logical consequence of having MODULE and
> IMPORTLIB separately in Makefiles (as opposed to, say, IMPORTLIB=1 and
> using MODULE for its name), so I sent the patch.

IMPORTLIB can be different, but it has no effect, the library name is
taken from the spec file name which has to match MODULE.

-- 
Alexandre Julliard
julliard(a)winehq.org