Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin-developers=delorie DOT com AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>,
	<http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 18:48:52 -0400
From: Chris Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com>
To: Mumit Khan <khan AT xraylith DOT wisc DOT EDU>
Cc: cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Subject: Re: libcygwin.a as a symbolic link to lib{c,m}.a -- need insight
Message-ID: <19990820184852.B7062@cygnus.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Mumit Khan <khan AT xraylith DOT wisc DOT EDU>,
	cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
References: <19990820133204 DOT A5087 AT cygnus DOT com> <199908202229 DOT RAA28257 AT mercury DOT xraylith DOT wisc DOT edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.6i
In-Reply-To: <199908202229.RAA28257@mercury.xraylith.wisc.edu>; from Mumit Khan on Fri, Aug 20, 1999 at 05:29:16PM -0500

On Fri, Aug 20, 1999 at 05:29:16PM -0500, Mumit Khan wrote:
>Chris Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com> writes:
>> I'm close to getting libcygwin.a linked to libc.a but I was wondering if
>> it should also be linked to libm.a.  
>
>Absolutely. Anything else is a potential source of future confusion. 
>The only reason it would make sense to link it (as opposed to leaving 
>it out completely) is because various software package expect -lm to 
>work. That's the reason I distribute a dummy libm.a, but can't link
>due to lack of native symlinks.

So, what do you think?  Should we just provide a dummy libc.a and
libm.a?  I think that it will be clearer what's going on if there is a
symbolic link, won't it?

Otherwise, we'll be getting messages like:

"My libc.a is only 14 bytes.  I think that's why I'm getting syntax errors
in my source file."


Anyway, thanks for the patch.  I'll apply it ASAP.

cgf