[vlc-devel] libvlc{, core}.dll.a missing in vlc-2.1.1-win32.7z (sdk/lib)

[Jean-Baptiste Kempf]

On 18 Nov, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote :
> On 18 Nov, Rafaël Carré wrote :
> > Le 18/11/2013 22:45, Jérôme Forissier a écrit :
> > > 
> > > On 18 nov. 2013, at 18:09, Rafaël Carré wrote:
> > > 
> > >> Le 17/11/2013 15:55, Jérôme Forissier a écrit :
> > >>>
> > >>> On 17 nov. 2013, at 11:29, Jean-Baptiste Kempf wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> On 17 Nov, Jérôme Forissier wrote :
> > >>>>> ...is it intentional?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> You should have the .lib for those.
> > >>>
> > >>> Indeed. But they should be named vlc.lib and vlccore.lib, according to http://www.mingw.org/wiki/Specify_the_libraries_for_the_linker_to_use
> > >>
> > >> Right because our DLL are libvlc.dll and libvlccore.dll and on unix
> > >> -lvlc removes the 'lib' prefix
> > >>
> > >> Can you try the following one-liner lib file ?
> > >>
> > >> $ cat vlc.lib
> > >> INPUT(libvlc.lib)
> > > 
> > > Works fine.
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > 
> > Thanks, I added these ones so the next nightly builds should have it.
> > 
> > BTW I think we could remove the libvlc.lib / libvlccore.lib name
> > completely, no?
> 
> Why? Visual Studio needs those, AFAIK.
> 
> Moreover, when compiling the contribs, all static libraries are called
> with libsomething.a and the flags are -lsomething. Therefore, our static
> libraries should be libvlc.(lib|dll.a) and should be fine to link with
> -lvlc. Why should it be different?

Not to mention that MingW links fine with just the dll here, so I don't
see the reason to break other setups for this usecase.

-- 
Jean-Baptiste Kempf
http://www.jbkempf.com/ - +33 672 704 734
Sent from my Electronic Device