Delivered-To: listarch-cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm Sender: cygwin-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com X-Authentication-Warning: modi.xraylith.wisc.edu: khan owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 11:37:29 -0600 (CST) From: Mumit Khan To: Juergen Lock cc: gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com Subject: Re: stop! (was: Re: cross compiler build fail (multiple definition of `fhandler_base::get_native_name(void)', and more)) In-Reply-To: <19990210181633.A8556@saturn.hb.north.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 10 Feb 1999, Juergen Lock wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 1999 at 03:46:30PM +0100, Juergen Lock wrote: > > This was the offending patch, now i have to find out how to fix it... > Good, but mind telling us what these patches are supposed to be doing and why precisely you need them? I seem to recognize some of the patches from a long time ago, but I could be mistaken; the trouble with old patches not integrated in an evolving project is that after a while you don't know if the problem was fixed in a different way. Unless you have a good reason to use these patches, I strongly recommend leaving all of these out; if there is a good reason, I would much rather see these sent to binutils maintainer to make sure these are integrated. There is a world of a difference between b17 binutils and b20.1 binutils. Regards, Mumit -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com