Re: Discrepancy between Installation and configure
>>>> "wmperry" == wmperry
<wmperry(a)aventail.com> writes:
wmperry> karlheg(a)cathcart.sysc.pdx.edu (Karl M. Hegbloom) writes:
> >>>>> "sb" == SL Baur
<steve(a)xemacs.org> writes:
>
sb> Installation sez: Compiling in DLL support.
>
sb> but the configure option is
--with-shlib/--without-shlib.
sb> These need to match. Which one is the preferred name?
>
>> I like `shlib' since I use Linux.
`DLL' is a "Windows" term,
>> isn't it? Or call it `dlopen', but maybe that's only the name
>> of the lib that does that on Linux.
wmperry> How about `DSO' like apache uses? Dynamic-Shared-Object
That's not bad. The "shared object" extension of `.so' could become
`.dso' then, on Linux. Perhaps on 95/98/NT and other Unices as well?
wmperry> Or go whole hog and spell the #%!＠#%! thing out. :)
I suppose for the `configure' switch, that would be appropriate. It
makes it readable, like long lisp variable names.