Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID:	<42D6FE30.16FE9D94@dessent.net>
Date:	Thu, 14 Jul 2005 17:07:12 -0700
From:	Brian Dessent <brian AT dessent DOT net>
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Missing symbols for linker called from gcc
References:	<26AF4E73922EDB44BE50FD3AAD868ADA112C50 AT naeajaxsez07 DOT nadsusea DOT nads DOT navy DOT mil>
X-Spam-Report:	-5.9/5.0 ---- Start SpamAssassin results * -3.3 ALL_TRUSTED Did not pass through any untrusted hosts * -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * 0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list ---- End SpamAssassin results
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

"Michel, Gustave A CIV N62306" wrote:
> 
> I've recently updated the cygwin (from 1.3.4-3) my standalone Win2K box, and gcc is failing because of missing symbols.  Here is a session:

If you had a Cygwin that ancient chances are you also had a prehistoric
binutils without the pseudo-reloc support.  This is why we ask for
people to provide "cygcheck -svr" output, because without it we are just
guessing at what versions of things you are trying to use.  So, since
you didn't provide enough information I would say as a wild guess to
make sure that you have the current version of both gcc and binutils.

Brian

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -