Re: AxKit working on ActivePerl

2000-09-04 Thread Randy Kobes
- Original Message - From: Gerald Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Matt Sergeant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Randy Kobes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2000 3:46 AM Subject: Re: AxKit working on ActivePerl > > Gerald >

Re: AxKit working on ActivePerl

2000-09-03 Thread Gerald Richter
> > I had thought this use of a static mod_perl lib was similar > in spirit to what Matt did with AxKit - include all the > *.obj files at link time, but still build mod_perl normally > with a dll. Yes, it is > As a test, I tried libapreq again, and found > it was missing 3 symbols from ApacheMo

Re: AxKit working on ActivePerl

2000-09-03 Thread Randy Kobes
On Sun, 3 Sep 2000, Gerald Richter wrote: > From my point of view it doesn't make any sense to have two versions of the > library, actualy I guess it will not work correctly, because Apache always > needs the DLL version and the DLL version and the static lib version will > _not_ share globales,

Re: AxKit working on ActivePerl

2000-09-03 Thread Gerald Richter
> One advantage of having the two is that the ApacheModulePerl.lib > in the usual mod_perl build is about 3 kB (and this is all that's > needed for mod_perl itself), while the static mod_perl lib is > about 960 kB. > When you build a DLL, like it is done now, ApacheModulePerl.lib is only used in

Re: AxKit working on ActivePerl

2000-09-02 Thread Randy Kobes
On Sat, 2 Sep 2000, Gerald Richter wrote: > > Gerald > > - do you just write .def files by hand? > > > > Yes, it is very simple. Here is an example from a project I have made some > time ago. It exports one symbol: Thanks very much for the explanations - that helps understanding this ... In

Re: AxKit working on ActivePerl

2000-09-02 Thread Gerald Richter
> Gerald > - do you just write .def files by hand? > Yes, it is very simple. Here is an example from a project I have made some time ago. It exports one symbol: LIBRARY NWCORE EXPORTS _InitNWCoreDLL As you see, the name of the function must be the mangeled name, in case of plain C, you

Re: AxKit working on ActivePerl

2000-09-02 Thread Matt Sergeant
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Randy Kobes wrote: > On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Matt Sergeant wrote: > > > I'm busy this weekend (wedding), so maybe you could take a look at the > > post-install thing. It works directly from MakeMaker's POST_INSTALL (I > > think thats the right option), and nmake ppd does all the

Re: AxKit working on ActivePerl

2000-09-01 Thread Randy Kobes
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Matt Sergeant wrote: > I'm busy this weekend (wedding), so maybe you could take a look at the > post-install thing. It works directly from MakeMaker's POST_INSTALL (I > think thats the right option), and nmake ppd does all the right > things. Also see NNML's ppd file/distribut

Re: AxKit working on ActivePerl

2000-09-01 Thread Randy Kobes
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Matt Sergeant wrote: > On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Randy Kobes wrote: > > On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Matt Sergeant wrote: > > > > >and a whole bunch of link problems - it wouldn't seem to link > > > to ApacheModulePerl.lib, so I had to add every damn .obj file in that > > > dire

Re: AxKit working on ActivePerl

2000-09-01 Thread Matt Sergeant
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Randy Kobes wrote: > On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Matt Sergeant wrote: > > > Well it seems to be working. Like Randy, I too haven't done much stress > > testing, and in fact haven't even done much no-stress testing, I just > > wanted to get a mail out saying I managed to compile it. >

Re: AxKit working on ActivePerl

2000-09-01 Thread Randy Kobes
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Matt Sergeant wrote: > Well it seems to be working. Like Randy, I too haven't done much stress > testing, and in fact haven't even done much no-stress testing, I just > wanted to get a mail out saying I managed to compile it. > > To get it to compile I had to remove a define