Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <3FA88BC9.8090902@adelaide.edu.au>
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 16:04:01 +1030
From: Milton Woods <milton DOT woods AT adelaide DOT edu DOT au>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Cygwin gcc-3.3.1 and pragma interface/implementation statements
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Greetings,

When building LyX version 1.3.x from source on Cygwin, I had problems 
during the final link stage where gcc-3.3.1 reported some undefined 
symbols. All of the 'undefined' symbols were actually defined in the LyX 
source code, and the compilation proceeded without errors on Linux. I 
found that the compilation was also successful on Cygwin once the 
#pragma interface/implementation statements were removed from the LyX 
source code. The LyX developers had taken reasonable care to protect the 
#pragma statements from incompatible compilers by using "#ifdef __GNUG__ 
" wrappers, but that did not seem to be good enough.

Does this experience reflect a bug in the gcc toolchain? Or are the LyX 
developers using #pragma statements incorrectly?

Milton Woods.



--
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/