Chris,
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 11:58:51PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 04:20:15PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 03:09:57PM -0400, Jason Tishler wrote:
> >>But, if one builds it with -lc, we get the following:
> >>
> >>$ gcc -o stat st
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 04:20:15PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 03:09:57PM -0400, Jason Tishler wrote:
>>While attempting to rebuild procmail against Cygwin 1.5.1, I believe I
>>have found a problem with libc.a that interferes with building 64-bit
>>apps.
>>
>>If one bu
> If one builds the attached test program without -lc, we get the
> following:
> $ gcc -o stat stat.c
> $ objdump -p stat.exe | fgrep stat
> 6100 510 _stat64
> But, if one builds it with -lc, we get the following:
> $ gcc -o stat stat.c -lc
> $ objdump -p stat.e
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 06:53:50PM +0200, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote:
>On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 12:14:21PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> I assume that you must not have correctly replaced your copy of
>> /lib/libc.a:
>>
>> % ls -l libc.a
>> ls -l libc.a
>> -rwxrwxrwx1 root cg
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 12:48:35AM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>Sounds like we need a 1.5.2.
>>Oh yeah. That was wicked easy.
>>
>>Can someone confirm or deny that the latest snapshot solves this
>>problem?
>
>Whimper.
>
>Cry.
>
>Whimper.
Sigh. I know.
cgf
--
Unsu
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 02:39:42PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 06:53:50PM +0200, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote:
> >On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 12:14:21PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >> I assume that you must not have correctly replaced your copy of
> >> /lib/libc.a
While attempting to rebuild procmail against Cygwin 1.5.1, I believe I
have found a problem with libc.a that interferes with building 64-bit
apps.
If one builds the attached test program without -lc, we get the
following:
$ gcc -o stat stat.c
$ objdump -p stat.exe | fgrep stat
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 11:10:15AM +0200, Ronald Landheer-Cieslak wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 11:58:51PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 04:20:15PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> >On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 03:09:57PM -0400, Jason Tishler wrote:
>> >>While attempti
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 03:09:57PM -0400, Jason Tishler wrote:
>While attempting to rebuild procmail against Cygwin 1.5.1, I believe I
>have found a problem with libc.a that interferes with building 64-bit
>apps.
>
>If one builds the attached test program without -lc, we get the
>following:
>
>
Gerrit,
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 10:10:31PM +0200, Gerrit P. Haase wrote:
> Jason, thank you very much!
You are very welcome. This one became quite a hang banger for me.
Knowing that I assisted someone else is helping to ease the pain... :,)
Jason
--
PGP/GPG Key: http://www.tishler.net/jason/p
On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 11:58:51PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 04:20:15PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >On Tue, Aug 05, 2003 at 03:09:57PM -0400, Jason Tishler wrote:
> >>While attempting to rebuild procmail against Cygwin 1.5.1, I believe I
> >>have found a pro
On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 12:14:21PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> I assume that you must not have correctly replaced your copy of
> /lib/libc.a:
>
> % ls -l libc.a
> ls -l libc.a
> -rwxrwxrwx1 root cgf741756 Aug 5 23:29 libc.a
> % sum libc.a
> 31407 725
>
> cgf
$
Christopher Faylor wrote:
Sounds like we need a 1.5.2.
Oh yeah. That was wicked easy.
Can someone confirm or deny that the latest snapshot solves this
problem?
Whimper.
Cry.
Whimper.
--
Chuck
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cy
13 matches
Mail list logo
