Re: [winegcc06] Delayed import

[Richard Cohen]

Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
>...
That's not a good strategy, we'll have to be in line with the gcc
people, and breaking compatibility like so is no good. Let's float
the question on their mailing list before we settle on something.
OK, do you want to do it or shall I?

In any case, we need to have our own extensions - eg to stop
winewrap creating a wrapper script.
I don't think this is a good idea. This is an implementation detail
that I'd rather not export -- we hope to get rid of this wrapper
sooner or later. Why do you want to disable it?
Well, it's just the difference in the programs/ Makefile between

$(MODULE).so: $(ALL_OBJS) $(RC_SRCS:.rc=.res) Makefile.in $(WINEWRAPPER)
        $(RM) $(BASEMODULE)
        $(WINEGCC) -m$(APPTYPE) $(ALLCFLAGS) $(ALL_OBJS) \
$(RC_SRCS:.rc=.res) -o $(MODULE) -L$(DLLDIR) -L$(LIBDIR) $(EXTRALIBS) \
$(LIBPORT) -Wl $(LDFLAGS) \
$(DELAYIMPORTS:%=-Wl,-delay-load,%) $(IMPORTS:%=-l%)
        $(RM) $(BASEMODULE) && $(LN_S) $(WINEWRAPPER) $(BASEMODULE)
and

$(MODULE).so: $(ALL_OBJS) $(RC_SRCS:.rc=.res) Makefile.in $(WINEWRAPPER)
        $(WINEGCC) -m$(APPTYPE) $(ALLCFLAGS) $(ALL_OBJS) \
$(RC_SRCS:.rc=.res) -o $(MODULE) -L$(DLLDIR) -L$(LIBDIR) $(EXTRALIBS) \
$(LIBPORT) -Wl,-no-script $(LDFLAGS) \
$(DELAYIMPORTS:%=-Wl,-delay-load,%) $(IMPORTS:%=-l%)
        $(RM) $(BASEMODULE) && $(LN_S) $(WINEWRAPPER) $(BASEMODULE)
I think the second is cleaner - but it's not really a big deal, and as 
you say it will disappear, but probably not in time for 0.9