X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,J_CHICKENPOX_62,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4A7F4184.6090704@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Sun, 09 Aug 2009 16:37:08 -0500 From: "Yaakov (Cygwin/X)" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.1) Gecko/20090715 Thunderbird/3.0b3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: libffi-3.0 (was: Re: How to install-libLTLIBRARIES dll to bin?) References: <6910a60907272310q54f29289l454117aff82afd5a AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <4A6ED94B DOT 8020003 AT gmail DOT com> <4A7E725C DOT 8010706 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <4A7ED3C9 DOT 70700 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm> <4A7F098B DOT 6030904 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <4A7F1317 DOT 4050800 AT gmail DOT com> In-Reply-To: <4A7F1317.4050800@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: 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 09/08/2009 13:19, Dave Korn wrote: > Ah, you won't have seen the recent thread. GCC and libffi are now synced > upstream. The version numbering is a red-herring; there were only ever minor > discrepancies between the two, it's not meant to be an API bump. I had wondered about that; a diff of the two versions' headers didn't show anything warranting the bump. > Hm, I'm not sure how (or even if for that matter) it ended up getting resolved, From a quick scan of the gcc patches list, it looks like they just synced the code between gcc and libffi. But, AFAICS from gcc SVN, they didn't add a libffi.pc pkg-config file, which the standalone version provides and some libffi-dependent packages expect to find. (Yes, I know how to override a pkg-config check, but still...) > but the upshot of it all is that we should be able to get away with just > shipping one version between us. That would be nice, but that won't be available until gcc-4.5, right? Until then, is the libffi in gcc-4.[34] work well enough on x86 to use in the meantime, particularly if the package explicitly depends on libffi-3.0? Yaakov -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple