This is the mail archive of the
cygwin@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Will libm.a always be a symlink? (or snapshot vs. release)
- To: Cygwin <cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Subject: Re: Will libm.a always be a symlink? (or snapshot vs. release)
- From: Jason Tishler <Jason dot Tishler at dothill dot com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 13:04:11 -0500
- Organization: Dot Hill Systems Corp.
- References: <20010327091000.B797@dothill.com> <20010327120731.A9780@redhat.com>
Chris,
On Tue, Mar 27, 2001 at 12:07:31PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2001 at 09:10:00AM -0500, Jason Tishler wrote:
> >IIRC, Cygwin binutils had been fixed to tolerate (i.e., ignore)
> >superfluous -lc and -lm options. If so, then it seems that this only
> >works when libm.a and libc.a are symlinks.
>
> Since libm.a, libc.a, and libcygwin.a are all different files, DJ's
> changes don't apply here. The safest thing to do is to reimplement the
> symbolic links yourself.
Thanks for the above -- this is exactly the information that I desired.
Jason
--
Jason Tishler
Director, Software Engineering Phone: +1 (732) 264-8770 x235
Dot Hill Systems Corp. Fax: +1 (732) 264-8798
82 Bethany Road, Suite 7 Email: Jason.Tishler@dothill.com
Hazlet, NJ 07730 USA WWW: http://www.dothill.com
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple