This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-xfree@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin XFree86 project.
Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Shadow Framebuffer Test 12
- To: "Smith, Martin" <martin at exchange dot Scotland dot NCR dot COM>,"Cygx \(E-mail\)" <cygwin-xfree at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Shadow Framebuffer Test 12
- From: "Robert Collins" <robert dot collins at itdomain dot com dot au>
- Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 20:06:29 +1000
- References: <B6CD5947CF30D411A1350050DA4B75FF026F3947@sgbdun200.scotland.ncr.com>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Smith, Martin" <martin@exchange.Scotland.NCR.COM>
To: "Cygx (E-mail)" <cygwin-xfree@sources.redhat.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 8:01 PM
Subject: RE: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Shadow Framebuffer Test 12
> Aha. Thanks for the explanation of why multiple cygwin dlls is a 'bad
> thing'. I was aware of the recommendation to avoid this but wasn't
clear on
> why (since, in my experience, this is not usually a problem with other
> Windows DLLs as long as they are kept in separate paths). Apologies if
this
> detailed explanation is already covered in the FAQ.
It is.
> On a related note, has the 'signature' of the cygwin dll changed with
> releases as well? ie. Have the exported functions changed? If so, does
this
> imply that sticking with the latest version might 'break' programs
expecting
> an earlier version?
>From B20.1 to now, only new functions have been exported. (AFAIK). I.E.
the ABI of B20.1 is a strict subset of the current ABI. The API has
changed somewhat, so newer compiles won't necessarily be able to work
with older cygwin1.dll's.
Rob