On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Roger Dannenberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for the info. I'm still an advocate for static linking, but I think > the following suggestion is a great idea: > >> >> * How about keeping the dll/.so version as portmidi and portmidi_s as the >> static one? That way most existing programs will not need to be changed >> (actually I'm not sure how many programs are using portmidi?), and the >> static version can still be selected by name. >> >> I haven't heard from anyone else on the list. If there's no opposition or > better ideas before Monday, I'll reconfigure everything to generate portmidi > (dynamic) and portmidi_s (static). I think that will at least keep 2 of us > happy :-) > > -Roger > > cool :) *happy dance*.
_______________________________________________ media_api mailing list [email protected] http://lists.create.ucsb.edu/mailman/listinfo/media_api
