Delivered-To:	listarch-cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com>
Message-ID:	<19990201085240.F25385@cygnus.com>
Date:	Mon, 1 Feb 1999 08:52:40 -0500
To:	cygwin32-developers AT cygnus DOT com
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Mailer:	Mutt 0.93i
Sender:	owner-cygwin32-developers AT cygnus DOT com

Approved: xkEFGdxk
From: jeffdbREMOVETHIS AT goodnet DOT com (Mikey)
To: cygwin32-developers AT cygnus DOT com
Subject: Re: tiny patch for execvp [Re: Problems with winsup-981223]
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 06:29:17 GMT
Organization: Never
Reply-To: jeffdbREMOVETHIS AT goodnet DOT com
Message-ID: <36b4f822 DOT 165663739 AT mail DOT goodnet DOT com>
References: <19981227212632 DOT A24196 AT cygnus DOT com> <199901300438 DOT UAA19176 AT cygnus DOT com> <19990130010435 DOT O10431 AT cygnus DOT com> <199901302309 DOT SAA00319 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <19990131001707 DOT A19124 AT cygnus DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <19990131001707 DOT A19124 AT cygnus DOT com>

On Sun, 31 Jan 1999 00:17:07 -0500, you wrote:

>On Sat, Jan 30, 1999 at 06:09:08PM -0500, DJ Delorie wrote:
>>> > _ctype_ DATA
>>>
>>> We run configure/builds almost every night and haven't run across a
>>> problem with this.  Have you updated your libcygwin.a?
>>
>>You would only see this problem if the native compiler was a
>>cygwin-hosted compiler.  In other words, on builds *on* NT would see
>>this.  Unix builds would never see this.
>
>I understand where the prpblem was coming from.  I thought that you
>actually did configure/build on NT fairly regularly.

Actually the only specific problem that this currently causes is that a
spurious -DNEED_sys_nerr and -DNEED_sys_errlist are generated, (or
whatever the macros are that trigger building the two I'm not running
configure right now :), which means that programs that link with
libiberty will get different static versions of sys_nerr, and
sys_errlist.

The reason I brought this up is so that the people who do core
development would be aware of the problems associated with using/not
using the DATA keyword in .def files.  and the consequences to configure
scripts.

I don't know who is responsible for maintaining the autoconf scripts
(Ian?) but I would think that probably not breaking configure (on 200+
targets :) is more important than the occasional breakage from programs
not including the correct header.  so I would vote to not use the DATA
keyword in cygwin32.

Then again this isn't a democracy.

- Raw text -