axis-c-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steven Nairn" <>
Subject libaxis2_http_common?
Date Fri, 09 May 2008 10:23:42 GMT

Is there a reason for having as a separate
shared library on Linux? On windows this DLL doesn't exist (all the
code goes into the axis2_engine DLL).

The reason I ask is that I'm in the process of building Axis2/C on AIX
which doesn't support building shared libraries that contain
unresolved symbols (or if it does support it I don't know how to do
it). To build the libaxis2_http_common shared library the
libaxis2_engine shared library must be included in the link to resolve
a bunch of symbols. Unfortunately to build the libaxis2_engine shared
library the libaxis2_http_common shared library must be included in
the link to resolve axis2_http_header_free,
axis2_http_header_get_value and axis2_http_accept_record_free (and
maybe some others - not sure). Neither library can be built without
the other being built first.

The difficult solution is to build a fake libaxis2_http_common shared
library with stubs of the required functions. Then libaxis2_engine can
be built using the fake libaxis2_http_common and then the real
libaxis2_http_common can be built using libaxis2_engine. It'd work but
it's quite a lot of trouble to go to (and difficult to do with

The easy solution is to lose the libaxis2_http_common library and
include all that code in libaxis2_engine - as is done for Windows.
Windows has the same restriction (no unresolved symbols) on building
DLLs which is presumably why the libraries are merged on that

So, is there any good reason for having libaxis2_http_common as a
separate library? Or should I create a Jira issue and attach a patch
to merge it with libaxis2_engine?

Steve Nairn

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message