Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <20000908160935.8085.qmail@web116.yahoomail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:09:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
Subject: Re: -lc and -lm
To: cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii


--- Chris Faylor <cgf AT cygnus DOT com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 09:58:30AM -0400, Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)
> wrote:
> >Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 09:58:30 -0400
> >To: cygwin developers <cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
> >From: "Larry Hall (RFK Partners, Inc)" <lhall AT rfk DOT com>
> >Subject: Re: -lc and -lm
> >In-Reply-To: <20000908123517 DOT 25018 DOT qmail AT web124 DOT yahoomail DOT com>
> >
> >At 08:35 AM 9/8/2000, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> >>Back in B18 when I started using Cygwin these libraries were stub
> libraries. 
> >>Is there a reason that they shouldn't be stub libraries instead of symlinks
> to
> >>cygwin runtime?
> >
> >Good question.  I remember a discussion on the topic of exactly what form 
> >these libraries should take in Cygwin back a long time ago.  I believe it 
> >was Mumit who suggested that these libraries could (and should) be symlinks
> >(I may not be remembering this correctly.)  Anyway, its my impression that
> >having libm.a and libc.a be symlinks to libcygwin.a is sufficiently 
> >problematic that it makes sense to explore other options.  
> >
> >There.  Now that we have my opinion, someone can go ahead and fix the 
> >problem!;-)
> 
> What does "problematic" mean?  The reason for making them something other
> than stubs is that some packages search for symbols there.  IF they are
> empty libraries there won't be any symbols to search for.
> 

Ah, that would be problematic.  So the solution:

1) modify ld?

2) modify the package configuration so that autoreconf will not add -lc or -lm
for the cygwin target?

3) live with it and deal with it on an individual bases?

Item 1 is the ideal; but, may be impractical.  Item 2 is doable but would take
years to get all of the package configurations modified.  Item 3 is what we
have now and IMO is not an acceptable solution.

Cheers,


=====
--- <http://earniesystems.safeshopper.com> ---
   Earnie Boyd: <mailto:earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
            __Cygwin: POSIX on Windows__
Cygwin Newbies: <http://gw32.freeyellow.com/>
           __Minimalist GNU for Windows__
  Mingw32 List: <http://www.egroups.com/group/mingw32/>
    Mingw Home: <http://www.mingw.org/>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
http://mail.yahoo.com/