[winegcc06] Delayed import

[Richard Cohen]

Dimitrie O. Paun wrote:
 >...
> That's not a good strategy, we'll have to be in line with the gcc
> people, and breaking compatibility like so is no good. Let's float
> the question on their mailing list before we settle on something.

OK, do you want to do it or shall I?
> 
>>In any case, we need to have our own extensions - eg to stop
>>winewrap creating a wrapper script.
> 
> I don't think this is a good idea. This is an implementation detail
> that I'd rather not export -- we hope to get rid of this wrapper
> sooner or later. Why do you want to disable it?
> 
Well, it's just the difference in the programs/ Makefile between

$(MODULE).so: $(ALL_OBJS) $(RC_SRCS:.rc=.res) Makefile.in $(WINEWRAPPER)
	$(RM) $(BASEMODULE)
	$(WINEGCC) -m$(APPTYPE) $(ALLCFLAGS) $(ALL_OBJS) \
$(RC_SRCS:.rc=.res) -o $(MODULE) -L$(DLLDIR) -L$(LIBDIR) $(EXTRALIBS) \
$(LIBPORT) -Wl $(LDFLAGS) \
$(DELAYIMPORTS:%=-Wl,-delay-load,%) $(IMPORTS:%=-l%)
	$(RM) $(BASEMODULE) && $(LN_S) $(WINEWRAPPER) $(BASEMODULE)

and

$(MODULE).so: $(ALL_OBJS) $(RC_SRCS:.rc=.res) Makefile.in $(WINEWRAPPER)
	$(WINEGCC) -m$(APPTYPE) $(ALLCFLAGS) $(ALL_OBJS) \
$(RC_SRCS:.rc=.res) -o $(MODULE) -L$(DLLDIR) -L$(LIBDIR) $(EXTRALIBS) \
$(LIBPORT) -Wl,-no-script $(LDFLAGS) \
$(DELAYIMPORTS:%=-Wl,-delay-load,%) $(IMPORTS:%=-l%)
	$(RM) $(BASEMODULE) && $(LN_S) $(WINEWRAPPER) $(BASEMODULE)

I think the second is cleaner - but it's not really a big deal, and as 
you say it will disappear, but probably not in time for 0.9