On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 11:02:36PM +0200, Marco atzeri wrote: >On 9/14/2011 5:02 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: >>Why do we need to add an arbitrary new extension here? Why isn't >>octave using "dll"? "oct" is certainly not a standard extension for a >>shared library. > >octave is using .oct on all platforms including linux > >upstream choice, no specific difference for cygwin
Maybe they should be called ".dll" on Cygwin then. Either that or we need to come up with some way for packages to register their idiosyncratic shared library extensions with rebaseall. cgf -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
