DLL vs. static: READMES need more instructions for static

DLL vs. static: READMES need more instructions for static

[neal olander]

Hey.  I've been using pthread on XP for several months now ... great 
library!!! thanks for all the hard work!

My application must be totally stand-alone, and we cannot deliver DLLs with 
our executable.  So I need a static version of pthreadVC2.lib.    Until 
yesterday, I was using pthreadVC2.dll.

I've got version 2.1.0 (16 March 2005) of Pthread lib.

It seems to me that static versions of pthread library on Windows are 
discouraged:  The Makefile only makes a DLL (and pthreadVC2.lib ... which is 
just a wrapper for the DLL).  Why is a static library avoided?

It took me many, many hours of hard work to get a static pthread.lib built 
in Visual C++ ... and I'm not 100% sure it is correct.  I had to have my 
application call
       int  status = pthread_win32_process_attach_np();
at the beginning to get it to work.   This took me forever to figure out.  
This guidance is buried in README.NONPORTABLE, so I cant claim it is totally 
missing.

May I suggest (in a very positive, helpful tone :-)  that you add to the 
readme:

IF YOU WANT STATIC LINKED LIBRARY
1)  undef _DLL
2) your appl must call  pthread_win32_process_attach_np();
3) In the key pthread header files, put in

#  ifdef PTW32_BUILD
#    define PTW32_DLLPORT extern
#  else
#    define PTW32_DLLPORT
#  endif

in lieu of the PTW32_BUILD stuff that is there now.
4) define PTW32_BUILD when building pthread static lib; undefine when
building your application.

==============================
THanks again for a great library!!!
My comments are simply given to try to help others that come along later 
that will want a static pthread library.

   neal




Neal Olander
olanderfamily@hotmail.com