X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,FREEMAIL_FROM,NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_RW,TW_WX,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
connect():	No such file or directory
From:	Paul Bibbings <paul DOT bibbings AT gmail DOT com>
Subject:	Re: gcc: building gcc-4.5.0 for Cygwin
Date:	Tue, 20 Apr 2010 20:28:43 +0100
Lines:	47
Message-ID:	<87eii92aac.fsf@gmail.com>
References:	<87y6go3743 DOT fsf AT gmail DOT com> <4BC904E3 DOT 60500 AT verizon DOT net> <878w8lx1kt DOT fsf AT gmail DOT com> <4BCD9A2A DOT 9060906 AT gmail DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.1 (windows-nt)
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
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

Dave Korn <dave DOT korn DOT cygwin AT googlemail DOT com> writes:

> On 17/04/2010 21:32, Paul Bibbings wrote:
>
>> The .dlls in question are:
>> 
>>     21:10:29 Paul Bibbings AT JIJOU
>>     ~ $ls -l /opt/gcc-4.5.0/bin | grep dll
>>     -rwxr-xr-x 1 ...  437743 Apr 15 09:08 cyggcc_s-1.dll
>>     -rwxr-xr-x 1 ...  271146 Apr 15 09:08 cyggomp-1.dll
>>     -rwxr-xr-x 1 ...   55679 Apr 15 09:08 cygssp-0.dll
>>     -rwxr-xr-x 1 ... 5829289 Apr 15 09:07 cygstdc++-6.dll
>> 
>> Maybe I am missing something in having these in the first place.  I
>> didn't get any new .dlls for gcc-4.4.1, for instance:
>
>   That'd be my fault.  GCC never used to build DLLs for anything, except
> libgcc, prior to 4.5.  Now it does, for all languages.  (At last, the simplest
> possible "hello world" in java isn't 45 megabytes any more.)  They install
> into $bindir, because that's where they need to be to be found easily;
> alongside the executables that require them.
>
>   Like a lot of libraries, they occasionally sprout new interfaces, but they
> should always remain backwardly-compatible.  Applications compiled with older
> GCC against older versions of the DLL ought to run just fine with the newer
> ones (it's a bug if they don't), but of course applications compiled with the
> newer compilers that actually make use of the new features in the newer
> versions of the DLLs won't be able to work with older ones.
>
>   From the end-user's point of view, the simple solution would be to not worry
> about switching them round or alternatives or any of that, but just make sure
> the newest ones are at the front of your $PATH at all times, you could even
> feel free to install them straight into /usr/bin and just overwrite the
> existing versions; everything should still work.

This last is good to know, and would essentially solve the issue for
me.  I shall give it a try and report back only if I encounter problems.

Thanks for the clarification.

(BTW.  I'm guessing by "That'd be my fault" that you're working on gcc
upstream?)

Regards

Paul Bibbings



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

- Raw text -