Thanks for the suggestion. In previous versions of the build tools, I
know I needed the .lib files.
I'm also not sure I'm copying the DLL files into the right directory, so
that maybe the linker isn't seeing it. This always confuses me as the
location used to build and compile is (potentially) different from the
test location and the final build location, and I'm not sure of the best
way to refer to these directories in my script. I'm thinking maybe I
need to copy the DLL into the src directory.
Unfortunately, I don't have a windows box on which to easily test. I'm
trying to get a virtualBox setup working so I can test more quickly.
--Russell
On 7/17/23 5:30 AM, Ivan Krylov wrote:
В Fri, 14 Jul 2023 22:25:51 +0300
Ivan Krylov <krylov.r...@gmail.com> пишет:
Maybe it's a red herring. Maybe the message from nm about missing file
has always been harmless, and what we're seeing here is a bug in the
toolchain; perhaps ld.exe doesn't like something about Netica.lib so
much that it crashes. I think that's less likely. If you run the
commands manually but without mentioning NeticaDLL, do you get a DLL
in the end?
Judging by your build logs, this could be a toolchain bug. If you set
the *.lib file aside and only give the *.dll to the linker (using
-l:Netica.dll if necessary), does it still fail? I know that GCC can
link directly to *.dll files, without relying on import libraries.
______________________________________________
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
