Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 12:07:31 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject: Re: Will libm.a always be a symlink? (or snapshot vs. release)
Message-ID: <20010327120731.A9780@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: Cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <20010327091000 DOT B797 AT dothill DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To: <20010327091000.B797@dothill.com>; from Jason.Tishler@dothill.com on Tue, Mar 27, 2001 at 09:10:00AM -0500

On Tue, Mar 27, 2001 at 09:10:00AM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote:
>While testing Rob Collins pthread support with the 2001-03-25 snapshot,
>I noticed that libm.a and libc.a were *not* symlinks to libcygwin.a as
>has been the case up till 1.1.8-2.  Is this an inherent difference
>between snapshots and releases?  Or, will 1.3.0 and later be this way too?

It's an inherent difference between snapshots and releases.  I fixup the
links when I build a net release.

>The reason why I'm bring this up is that when -lm is supplied during
>linking and libm.a is *not* a symlink to libcygwin.a, then one will
>get link errors such as the following:
>
>    gcc -shared -Wl,--enable-auto-image-base \
>    -Wl,--out-implib=libpython2.1.dll.a -o libpython2.1.dll \
>    Modules/getbuildinfo.o ... -lm
>    /usr/lib/libcygwin.a(ds00023.o)(.text+0x0): multiple definition of `__infinity'
>    /usr/lib/libm.a(s_infconst.o)(.text+0x0): first defined here
>
>IIRC, Cygwin binutils had been fixed to tolerate (i.e., ignore)
>superfluous -lc and -lm options.  If so, then it seems that this only
>works when libm.a and libc.a are symlinks.

Since libm.a, libc.a, and libcygwin.a are all different files, DJ's
changes don't apply here.  The safest thing to do is to reimplement the
symbolic links yourself.

cgf

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple