Re: [Libusb-devel] [PATCH][WIN][2/8] introduced symbolexports (.def) for Windows DLLs

[Orin E. <ori...@gm...>]

On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 11:08 PM, Peter Stuge <pe...@st...> wrote:

> Orin Eman wrote:
> > You are dealing with WINDOWS here.  Not Linux, not Darwin, not BSD.
> > Windows developers expect a def file or __declspec.
>
> I do think declspec will be part of the solution.
>
>
> > If you don't give them one or the other, they will make their own
> > and you have lost control.
>
> I don't get the control thing. I just think that so far there's not a
> great solution for the problem, so I'd rather just come back to it
> later.
>


This whole thread is about control...


>
>
> > it won't be pretty, but that's Windows for you.
>
> I don't really buy that.. Just because Windows is a mess doesn't mean
> libusb has to be one. I've written a couple of Windows programs and
> so far not had problems that couldn't be solved nicely. Sure, it may
> be (much) more complicated than on other systems, but still possible.
>
>
> > In addition, if you don't supply vcproj files, they will make one,
> > likely get it wrong and produce incompatible libusb dlls.
>
> I do think that's their problem. As developers in the libusb project
> I don't think we are really responsible for what others are doing.
>
>
> > Again, you have lost control.
>
> Sorry, I don't get the control thing. libusb is here, use it if it
> suits you, wait a little more if it doesn't just yet.
>


But some people don't wait and use what they can find now.  If I had
(irreversibly) ported my code from WinUsb to libusb then I'd have had to
ship whatever was in libusb-pbatard months ago.  As it was, I only ifdef'd
the changes for our Darwin version and the Windows version continues to use
WinUsb.  Given LGPL, I'd have had to make my source available and in the
spirit of LGPL, I'd have had to call my library libusb so the user could
replace it with a later version.


Orin.