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

Christian Ehrlicher wrote:
> Sheri schrieb:
>
>> 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. :)
>>
>>
> Ok, I'll add an option for mingw only and mark it as 'advanced' to
> restore backward compatibility.
>
>
>
Would it make sense and also be possible to add similar options for
"suffix"?

If I use configure & make (in Msys/mingw), electing shared libraries I
get pcre-0.dll, pcreposix-0.dll and pcrecpp-0.dll. But electing static
libraries, I get pcre.a, pcreposix.a and pcrecpp.a. Possibly someone
making the switch to cmake might like to maintain filename suffix
compatibility. I don't know if this is only applicable in mingw or not.
Philip, are name suffixes consistent between Configure and make vs cmake
built shared and static libraries on Linux?

Regards,
Sheri