16 May
2009
16 May
'09
7:26 a.m.
On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 11:07 +0100, Neil Mitchell wrote:
I don't, although having that option wouldn't be a bad thing - having a minimal .lib is perfectly reasonable as a default. Having a massive .lib seems crazy. (The fact that .lib is named .dll.a isn't too much of an issue)
It's possible to create a minimal import lib via a .def file (which lists the exports). I think the dlltool helps with that.
So my suggestion is remove it, if you're linking using gcc it should work.
I'm not linking the .dll at all, only using dynamic linking, which works without the .lib. But I don't really want to start removing files - doing that in a build system seems like a bad idea.
Sure, so at least you don't have to install them. Duncan