Re: Renaming libcruft

[marco atzeri]

On 8/24/2012 6:33 PM, John W. Eaton wrote:
> On 24-Aug-2012, Michael Goffioul wrote:
>
> | If I may add something, splitting up further will complicate the symbol export
> | mechanism.
>
> My proposal is not to split things up further.  It's to merge libcruft
> and liboctave.  The multiple divisions that I proposed are just for
> internal convenience when building, same as we now use for building
> liboctinterp.  These extra convenience libraries are not exposed to
> the user.  The user would see only liboctave, liboctinterp, and
> liboctgui.
>
> jwe

considering the small size of libcruft versus liboctave

$ ls -1sh *.dll
512K cygcruft-1.dll
 14M cygoctave-1.dll
960K cygoctgui-0.dll
 16M cygoctinterp-1.dll

It makes sense and we should save same space and time
removing a linking phase.

Regards
Marco