X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-3.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<49BA90F6.4000908@cwilson.fastmail.fm>
Date:	Fri, 13 Mar 2009 12:59:34 -0400
From:	Charles Wilson <cygwin AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.19) Gecko/20081209 Thunderbird/2.0.0.19 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: experimental package: gcc4-4.3.2-2
References:	<announce DOT 49B8BA01 DOT 3000103 AT gmail DOT com> <49B955B0 DOT 40501 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <49BA0145 DOT 2050703 AT gmail DOT com> <49BA0412 DOT 2060007 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <49BA0835 DOT 5040800 AT gmail DOT com> <49BA87C0 DOT 9020302 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net>
In-Reply-To:	<49BA87C0.9020302@users.sourceforge.net>
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
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

Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> Dave Korn wrote:
>>   Can you take this one upstream for us?  LT really ought to know about these
>> two options, they're not even Cygwin-specific at all.
> 
> Chuck would probably be a better candidate for that, as he works with
> them already.

No, not really.  I've had a number of patches sitting in the queue since
November.  I think ANYONE else might get better responsiveness upstream.
 Bitter? ME? Nah...

Frankly, Ralf W. is overworked.  There are four maintainers, but Peter
O'G, and Gary V. are MIA, and Bob F. never reviews patches.

However, about this specific issue: it has been reported before:
http://www.mail-archive.com/libtool AT gnu DOT org/msg08402.html

even though it was considered a bug:
http://www.opensubscriber.com/message/libtool AT gnu DOT org/3395177.html

the last line states:
"I don't see a coherent solution to this mess ATM."

It looks like CC='gcc -static-libgcc' (or, in our case for now,
-shared-libgcc and CXX='g++ -shared-libgcc -shared-libstdc++' etc) is
the "solution".

--
Chuck

--
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 -