From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Keil To: jonadab@bright.net, cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: RE: CYGWIN1.DLL Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 09:53:00 -0000 Message-id: <50A89B19AEAAD411B9D200A0C9FB5699010C8E20@craius.cportcorp.com> X-SW-Source: 2001-07/msg01050.html I'm curious Just why are Microsoft's dynamic linking mechanism problematic? And what are the implications and why do you think that Cygwin uses dynamic linking? Thanks, Mark -----Original Message----- From: Jonadab the Unsightly One [ mailto:jonadab@bright.net ] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 11:11 AM To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: CYGWIN1.DLL # I agree 100% with most of what was written here. In fact, I think it # think it might even be nice to add it to the documentation. # # However, I do not agree that static linking is generally a # universally good idea for any platform. I was talking about Microsoft platforms specifically, because Microsoft's dynamic linking mechanism is problematic. Any platform of course may implement something (e.g., dynamic libraries) well or poorly. I also understand (or think I understand) why Cygwin uses dynamic linking, and it doesn't bother me tremendously, but it does have some implications -- which are really Microsoft's fault, but impact Cygwin nonetheless. Some of these implications come home to roost when we start talking about different people distributing different packages that are built against different versions of Cygwin. There is potential there for problems. -- Your font seems to be: proportional fixed ^ | (Fontmeter only accurate for about 90% of fonts.) -- 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/ -- 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/