Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Fri, 24 Nov 2000 13:23:34 +0000 (GMT)
From:	Reuben Thomas <rrt1001 AT cam DOT ac DOT uk>
X-Sender:	rrt AT localhost DOT localdomain
To:	cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Subject:	Re: Linking problem
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.LNX.4.21.0011231155400.28587-100000@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID:	<Pine.LNX.4.21.0011241321060.32711-100000@localhost.localdomain>
MIME-Version:	1.0

On Thu, 23 Nov 2000, Reuben Thomas wrote:

[snip]
> The first binary (exc3.exe) doesn't work, and crashes with the infamous
> 
> Application Error
> The application failed to initialize properly (0xc0000005). Click on OK to
> terminate the application
[snip]
> Surely the order in which the directories holding the import libraries were
> created shouldn't affect the binaries created by the linker?!

Some more digging reveals that (AFAICS) the output of ld -verbose for the
two binaries is identical. What is not identical is the order of the DLLs
written in to the executables. I've looked at the source for ld and the bfd
library, but I'm rather overwhelmed by it. Can anyone tell me where the
names of the DLLs are being written into the executable?

(Hmm...perhaps I should take this to the binutils list...)

-- 
http://sc3d.org/rrt/ | violence, n.  bravery for cowards


--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com

- Raw text -