[glideplan_swproj] Re: [glideplan_swproj] Re: libraries

  • From: Tomáš Zámečník <pulcik@xxxxxxxx>
  • To: glideplan_swproj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 17:28:53 +0100 (CET)

Sounds reasonable.
T.

> ------------ Původní zpráva ------------
> Od: Cestmir Houska <czestmyr@xxxxxxxxx>
> Předmět: [glideplan_swproj] Re: libraries
> Datum: 07.2.2012 17:23:44
> ----------------------------------------
> Ah, I just remembered - Qt didn't allow us to create static plugins
> when it was dynamically linked. So we would have to link the
> non-plugin libraries our own way (independently of Qt).
>
> Cestmir
>
> 2012/2/7 Cestmir Houska <czestmyr@xxxxxxxxx>:
> > Yes, I meant non-plugin libraries. But I just realized that at the
> > beginning of the project, we had some problem with static vs. dynamic
> > linking. I just can't remember what it was...
> >
> > Cestmir
> >
> > 2012/2/7 Tomáš Zámečník <pulcik@xxxxxxxx>:
> >> You mean linked during build?
> >> Because of the possibility of adding/removing single plugins.
> >> In case of non-plugin libraries I agree. I think they could be static.
> >>
> >> T.
> >>
> >>> ------------ Původní zpráva ------------
> >>> Od: Cestmir Houska <czestmyr@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>> Předmět: [glideplan_swproj] libraries
> >>> Datum: 07.2.2012 16:46:31
> >>> ----------------------------------------
> >>> HI,
> >>>
> >>> I am searching for the solution to the problem with linking of
> >>> libraries on Linux (and possibly Mac) and it suddenly struck me - why
> >>> don't we make all the libraries static??
> >>>
> >>> Cestmir
> >>>
> >>> To visit archive or unsubscribe, follow:
> >>> http://www.freelists.org/list/glideplan_swproj
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> To visit archive or unsubscribe, follow:
> >> http://www.freelists.org/list/glideplan_swproj
>
> To visit archive or unsubscribe, follow:
> http://www.freelists.org/list/glideplan_swproj
>
>
>

To visit archive or unsubscribe, follow:
http://www.freelists.org/list/glideplan_swproj

Other related posts: