Re: [AD] Should dllsyms.lst be there?

Re: [AD] Should dllsyms.lst be there?

[ Thread Index | Date Index | More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives ]

To: alleg-developers@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [AD] Should dllsyms.lst be there?
From: Peter Wang <novalazy@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:35:25 +1100

On 2007-11-26, Trent Gamblin <trentg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 11/25/07, Peter Wang <novalazy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Line 79 of fixdll.sh seems not to work.  My guess is one of the files is
> > empty or line ending differences.
> 
> I think you're right. dllsyms.lst should be in unix format.

Maybe fix.bat or fix.sh changed it?

Peter

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [AD] Should dllsyms.lst be there?
  - From: Trent Gamblin

References:
- [AD] Should dllsyms.lst be there?
  - From: Trent Gamblin
- Re: [AD] Should dllsyms.lst be there?
  - From: Peter Wang
- Re: [AD] Should dllsyms.lst be there?
  - From: Trent Gamblin
- Re: [AD] Should dllsyms.lst be there?
  - From: Peter Wang
- Re: [AD] Should dllsyms.lst be there?
  - From: Trent Gamblin

Messages sorted by: [ date | thread ]
Prev by Date: Re: [AD] Should dllsyms.lst be there?
Next by Date: Re: [AD] Should dllsyms.lst be there?
Previous by thread: Re: [AD] Should dllsyms.lst be there?
Next by thread: Re: [AD] Should dllsyms.lst be there?

Mail converted by MHonArc 2.6.19+

http://listengine.tuxfamily.org/