Delivered-To: listarch-cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com>
Message-ID: <19990216002959.B12208@cygnus.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 00:29:59 -0500
To: Mumit Khan <khan AT xraylith DOT wisc DOT edu>, DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
Cc: cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Subject: Re: tiny winsup config patch
References: <199902160016 DOT TAA28214 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 93 DOT 990215231806 DOT 23933A-100000 AT modi DOT xraylith DOT wisc DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.93.990215231806.23933A-100000@modi.xraylith.wisc.edu>; from Mumit Khan on Mon, Feb 15, 1999 at 11:21:10PM -0600

On Mon, Feb 15, 1999 at 11:21:10PM -0600, Mumit Khan wrote:
>On Mon, 15 Feb 1999, DJ Delorie wrote:
>> I didn't think you *could* build cygwin1.dll without newlib in the
>> same tree.  Even if you could, the newlib we build with is the one we
>> want includes from, so if we know where that is, that's where we
>> should get includes from.
>
>In that case, I suggest having winsup configure check for newlib in the 
>build tree, and choke if not found. We basically add -nostinc when
>compiling both winsup and winsup/utils, and also EXE_LDFLAGS always
>has '-B../../newlib -L../'.
>
>If this seems appropriate, and it does to me to avoid bizarre and hard 
>to track down errors, it's a trivial change. I'll send a patch if ok.

I don't think that it should be the function of winsup's configure to
ensure that the build environment which surrounds it is ok.  Cygnus
provides a build environment.  If you don't want to use it, then you
take your lumps.

If you're going to check for ../newlib, then you should check for
../libiberty and ../include, too.  Do we really want to go down that
path?

-chris