"Boaz Harrosh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have noticed that my .spec.c file is very different than your .spec.c > file from above. I am using winebuild downloaded from source forge, as > of 20031212. > > Now if I use your suggested .spec file. I am missing the FooSTD > altogether. If I remove one of the @8 than I am back to my old problem. > > [Q-1] Why is my .spec.c file so different than yours? could you please > check my command line switches? could you please send me your makefiles > (command line) that produced above results.
Our spec file are different because my one is for Foo.dll, and yours is for fooapp.exe. Anyway I'm attaching my sources and Makefiles. I simply integrated Foo.dll into Wine dll/ tree and hacked Makefiles accordingly. And no, I didn't succeed linking with Foo.dll.so. Mainly because winebuild doesn't know how to resolve a non stdcall decorated symbol to a decorated one. Let's wait for Alexandre and hear his opinion whether it worths the trouble adding support for linking with broken Windows DLLs. -- Dmitry.
foo.tar.bz2
Description: Binary data
