Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 23:58:51 -0400 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: cygwin 1.5.1 libc.a link problem Message-ID: <20030806035851.GA3943@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <20030805190957 DOT GA2180 AT tishler DOT net> <20030805202015 DOT GA7981 AT redhat DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030805202015.GA7981@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 04:20:15PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: >On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 03:09:57PM -0400, Jason Tishler wrote: >>While attempting to rebuild procmail against Cygwin 1.5.1, I believe I >>have found a problem with libc.a that interferes with building 64-bit >>apps. >> >>If one builds the attached test program without -lc, we get the >>following: >> >> $ gcc -o stat stat.c >> $ objdump -p stat.exe | fgrep stat >> 6100 510 _stat64 >> >>But, if one builds it with -lc, we get the following: >> >> $ gcc -o stat stat.c -lc >> $ objdump -p stat.exe | fgrep stat >> 6130 945 stat > >Ok. Interesting. I know what the problem is. Should be "easy" to fix. > >Sounds like we need a 1.5.2. Oh yeah. That was wicked easy. Can someone confirm or deny that the latest snapshot solves this problem? cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/