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
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: broken ncurses-installation
References: <87g0epjj8f DOT fsf AT mybaby DOT home DOT felix>
	<687389018 DOT 20010501174234 AT logos-m DOT ru> <8766fjpydh DOT fsf AT mybaby DOT home DOT felix>
	<3AF04EE0 DOT 1970FC9C AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
From: Felix Natter <f DOT natter AT ndh DOT net>
Date: 03 May 2001 19:51:51 +0200
In-Reply-To: <3AF04EE0.1970FC9C@ece.gatech.edu>
Message-ID: <87zocul3rc.fsf@mybaby.home.felix>
Lines: 32
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/21.0.100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> writes:

> Felix, this is the second time you have explicitly listed your "command
> line" -- but that "command line" did not have the required '-lcurses'
> argument.  This is also the second time you have claimed, "oh yeah, I
> "of course" had that option" after somebody pointed out that it was
> missig.  Are you SURE you had the -lcurses?  (Or did you forget to type
> the MOST IMPORTANT fraggin' part of the command in TWO separate email
> messages, but "of course" NOT forget when typing it in their shell?  --

I just copied the first mail and forgot to correct that mistake.

> cut-n-paste from the command window is your friend...)

yes, my windows-skills are very limited (without having emacs around ;-)).
 
> Also, the fact that '-lcurses' was not included in your email messages
> means that we don't know *where* in your command line the 'lcurses'
> argument appeared (you know it has to come *after* the object files that
> require it, right?)

yes, *thank you* that was it.
I attempted:
        gcc -lcurses test_curses.c -o test_curses.exe
and this works:
        gcc test_curses.c -o test_curses.exe -lcurses

Is there a reason why gcc/ld behave different than on GNU/Linux
(the first command works fine on linux) ? 

-- 
Felix Natter

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