On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 08:08:33PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >On Apr 6 13:33, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 06:29:43PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> >Wouldn't it help if libc.a, libm.a etc. wouldn't export any symbols at >> >all? I mean, eventually there's libcygwin.a linked in which satisfies >> >all of the requested symbols. What would break if the secondary libs >> >pointing to cygwin1.dll would be stubs? >> >> We rehashed all of this years ago. IIRC, some configuration scripts >> actually look for symbols explicitly in the libraries. > >Hmm, too bad. So it was a naive thought.
I think I had the same thought while resisting the whole concept of speclib. Maybe I should have resisted harder. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
