On May 18 14:03, DJ Delorie wrote: > > > And the problem is that libiberty is assuming that it *knows* what > > functions newlib provides, so that it doesn't need to check > > directly. This is just broken... > > Historically, cygwin was built using libiberty and newlib, so you did > not have a runtime at the time you were building libiberty, because > you hadn't built newlib yet. > > In a combined tree, target-libiberty is still built before > target-newlib, so the problem exists there too. > > At this point, though, I'm tempted to say "there's no such thing as a > target libiberty" and rip all the target-libiberty rules out, and let > newlib-hosted targets autodetect the host-libiberty. That is, if > Cygwin doesn't need a target-libiberty any more?
Cygwin doesn't need libiberty anymore since 2007. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Cygwin Project Co-Leader Red Hat
