X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Subject: Re: Linux vs Cygwin linkage From: skaller To: Eric Blake Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com In-Reply-To: <43F76CF4.7030001@byu.net> References: <1140287981 DOT 4091 DOT 76 DOT camel AT rosella DOT wigram> <43F76CF4 DOT 7030001 AT byu DOT net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 14:01:51 +1100 Message-Id: <1140318111.4091.83.camel@rosella.wigram> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: 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 On Sat, 2006-02-18 at 11:52 -0700, Eric Blake wrote: > According to skaller on 2/18/2006 11:39 AM: > > I have found some unexpected differences between Cygwin > > and Linux. FYI I think Cygwin is right, and Linux is wrong. > > No, they are both right, in their own way. Windows .dlls cannot use > undefined symbols, whereas Linux shared objects can [snip] Ok, and Linux default is for backwards compatibility. Thanks for confirming! -- John Skaller Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net -- 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/