[xml] RE: win32 file support for building libxml

Hi Manish,

You don't really need the iconv_a.lib file at all. The libxml2 MSVC make
procedure just looks for a file named "iconv.lib" when linking (assuming
iconv support has been selected during configuration). The DLL import
library version would normally be used, and that's all that is required.

But there might be circumstances (I suppose) where one wishes to build
libxml2 with iconv support, but doesn't want to use the libiconv DLL. If
that is the case, then one can just move the DLL import library version
out of the way, rename iconv_a.lib back to iconv.lib, and do the make. 

In short, the static version of iconv.lib (iconv_a.lib) is provided as a
convenience for anyone wishing to make use of it, but it isn't normally
required or used.

Eric Zurcher
CSIRO Plant Industry
Canberra, Australia
Eric Zurcher csiro au 

-----Original Message-----
From: Manish Marathe [mailto:mmarathe spikesource com] 
Sent: Thursday, 2 March 2006 9:34 AM
To: Zurcher, Eric (PI, Black Mountain)
Cc: XML Group
Subject: RE: win32 file support for building libxml

On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 09:19 +1100, Eric Zurcher csiro au wrote:

On Win32, libiconv can be built either as a DLL (with associated
library) or as a "static" library. The zip file includes the results
both builds: iconv.lib is the import library for iconv.dll;
is the static library. The iconv_a.lib file is what you get when you
the standard build procedure without the "DLL=1" option. The result
library was renamed to iconv_a.lib to prevent the problems arising
having two different files names "iconv.lib".

At least I think that's how it happened. Am I right, Igor?

Thanks Eric for your mail. Even I thought that iconv_a.lib could be a
static library. When I build libiconv-1.9.2 with standard build
procedure and without using DLL=1 option, it built the standard
iconv.lib and not iconv_a.lib. 

I just wanted to confirm if I can just rename it to iconv_a.lib or there
is something more in it ? Even changing the Makefile.msvc could be an
option but is it needed?

Am I missing something?

Thanks folks!!


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]