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 From: "Ivan Warren" To: Subject: RE: getopt: ugly linker messages Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 01:43:54 +0200 Message-ID: <000401c37fd1$0d5ce4f0$0100000a@PCHOMEISW> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <20030920232724.GB17101@redhat.com> > > Sigh. By "research", I meant dive into the binutils code and > figure out what is going wrong. Geez.. You kidding me ? I mean, I wouldn't mind doing that.. But it would probably take me a month or so to just figure out the basics of how it works... Not to mention I have but very little understanding of how the 386 PE works (just enough to figure out there might be a problem with it when I see one..). I really thought it'd be smarter to ask folks who are more comfortable with it. (ps : I already did it for some gcc issues.. And it took me ages just to figure out the architecture.. I'm pretty sure it'd be the same with binutils).. If I had made all that searching, spent a lot of time sorting out a "binutils in 386 PE" environment issue, then I'm not spending time on the project I usually work on.. And if I had found the issue & had a patch, I definitelly wouldn't have asked a question. I would have proposed a patch. > > >Hopefully, I'll get a better response from the binutils > folks who may > >find a solution to an issue that DOES affect cygwin (and any other > >environment using the PE 386 object format). > > You already posted to the binutils mailing list, remember? Yeah.. Of course I do remember that.. (not senile yet ;-) ).. But unfortunatelly, I made the same mistake I did here : I told them I *DID* post in the other forum. Thus leading to the effect that each list thinks it's a problem that is in the other group field of expertise. So my option is now to tell the binutils folks that the cygwin folks are declaring this issue to be a binutils core issue and that it has nothing to do with cygwin (although it does affect it).. Am I correct ? --Ivan -- 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/