Re: Makedll.rules.in

[Gregg Mattinson]

Oops..  This patch fixes the linking of tests, but it breaks..well..all the 
.dlls, atleast for me.

So, my question is, why does the $(MODULE).so rule in Makedll.rules.in contain 
$(LDDLLFLAGS)?  Until I submitted this patch, that variable was not defined in 
the makefiles for the .dlls, and the dlls appeared to work fine.  Now that this 
flag is defined, the .dlls don't work, but the tests do work.  Should LDDLLFLAGS 
be removed from the $(MODULE).so rule?  What is LDDLLFLAGS defined to on Linux?  
I only have a Solaris box here to test on, so my insight into the problem is 
limited.

Any insight would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Gregg
> From: Gregg Mattinson 
> Subject: Makedll.rules.in
> To: [e-mail]
> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 10:39:22 -0400 (EDT)
>
> Changelog: dlls/Makedll.rules.in
> - Added LDDLLFLAGS to Makedll.rules.in so that tests get linked properly
>
> Gregg Mattinson
> Co-op Developer
> Sun Microsystems of Canada

Makedll.rules.in

[Alexandre Julliard]

Gregg Mattinson  writes:
> So, my question is, why does the $(MODULE).so rule in Makedll.rules.in contain 
> $(LDDLLFLAGS)?  Until I submitted this patch, that variable was not defined in 
> the makefiles for the .dlls, and the dlls appeared to work fine.  Now that this 
> flag is defined, the .dlls don't work, but the tests do work.  Should LDDLLFLAGS 
> be removed from the $(MODULE).so rule?  What is LDDLLFLAGS defined to on Linux?  
> I only have a Solaris box here to test on, so my insight into the problem is 
> limited.

The idea is that all dlls should be linked with LDDLLFLAGS; however
only dlls that are properly separated can use it at this point, which
is why LDDLLFLAGS is not defined in Makedll.rules, only in the
individual makefiles of the dlls that have to use it. This is why your
patch breaks for non-separated dlls. I have committed a different fix
that I believe should work for you too.