Re: [pcre-dev] Current state of cmake support

Christian Ehrlicher wrote:
>> Where are you heading on those prefixes? We need at least the option to
>> make dlls in mingw and msys/mingw without "lib" prefix. All previous and
>> current releases that included cmake build options did it for pcre and
>> pcreposix without asking. (Problem was, it was also done for static
>> libraries, and unix builds prior to latest). In my trial build with
>> current revisions, it made libpcre.dll, libpcreposix.dll and libpcrecpp.dll.
>>
>>
> Do you really need such an option? Why? It was wrong.
> If you need it we can add an option explicit for mingw.
>
Yes, sorry I really do. :)

I don't think I'm alone in wanting the library names to remain
consistent with what they've built in the past, but the reason I need it
is that I maintain the pcre libraries for an application that is already
built. It was built in MSVC 6. I don't have its source and I don't have
MSVC 6. Libraries built in MS Express (MSVC 8) have an incompatible
runtime and the application is looking for pcre.dll and pcreposix.dll.
Users download my updates and replace just replace those two files.
Actually support for libpcre.dll and libpcreposix.dll was added, but
precedence is given to pcre.dll and pcreposix.dll. I believe that user
updates would be unnecessarily complicated if the dll names change.

Regards,
Sheri