Dave Korn wrote:
> Yep, that's more-or-less what I was referring to by "stunk thubbery" ;-)
With one important difference: the plan you outlined relies on the .exe
exporting the function that overrides the copy in the dll. This is
somewhat controversial (IMHO) in that it requires adorning the
I should insert a disclaimer at this point: I don't fully grok weak symbols.
What I know is what I've gathered from some googling, browsing the (very old
and I don't know in what ways outdated) copy of the gABI docs at the old
caldera site, and skimming the Codesourcery ABI pages.
Right, no
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> NightStrike wrote on 10 September 2008 19:22:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Christopher Faylor
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 01:53:45PM -0400, NightStrike wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at
Dave Korn wrote:
> If they were instead resolved to some kind of thunk that could do a lookup
> at runtime for non-weak versions of the same symbol, we'd be golden. Well,
> we'd need to make sure the non-weak versions were all declspecced dllexport
> somehow, but that would do it for us.
Well
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Dave Korn wrote:
> OK. Suits me.
While you're at it, I would override LIBINTL and LIBICONV with their
dynamic counterparts.
> The problem is the major difference between ELF DSOs and PE DLLS: DLLs have
> to be fully resolved at link-time, not
Brian Dessent wrote on 12 September 2008 08:58:
> Dave Korn wrote:
>
>>> Why bother?
>>
>> Hence the "may". I don't plan to bother for myself, but it depends if
>> I
>
> Please don't.
OK. Suits me.
>> That's all I get from a default build, I'm not sure if
>> --disable-libjava is the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
According to Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) on 9/12/2008 3:36 AM:
> I've seen a *small* number of packages using it so far, so it would be
> nice to try. But we'll need autoconf-2.62 as well.
Or even the just-released autoconf-2.63.
- --
Don't work too hard,
Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) wrote on 12 September 2008 08:51:
>> Because I didn't use libtool to do it. I think Aaron's patch to build
>> libgcc shared from upstream does it properly, so I'll be adopting it if
>> I can, otherwise I'll just crudely bodge it in.
>
> Since the name of the libgcc dll is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Brian Dessent wrote:
> Please don't. gcc isn't special in this regard, it shouldn't receive
> any special treatment. bash fails without cygintl-8.dll and I don't
> think anyone is proposing to statically link libintl into bash just
> because some p
Dave Korn wrote:
> > Why bother?
>
> Hence the "may". I don't plan to bother for myself, but it depends if I
Please don't. gcc isn't special in this regard, it shouldn't receive
any special treatment. bash fails without cygintl-8.dll and I don't
think anyone is proposing to statically link
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Dave Korn wrote:
> :) If so, I will submit upstream. Actually I think I can probably do it
> all with the hooks and overrides, but I haven't got up-to-date with the
> prep_gnu_info changes yet ...
In that case, you know where to find me. :-)
>
René Berber wrote on 11 September 2008 18:11:
>>> Has anyone tested it?
>>
>> Well, yeah :)
>
> That much I knew, it's the normal way gcc builds itself.
I also did before-and-after regression tests, and spent some time
investigating and solving regressions which involved recompiling the tes
Dave Korn wrote:
> René Berber wrote on 10 September 2008 23:29:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Has anyone tested it?
>
> Well, yeah :)
That much I knew, it's the normal way gcc builds itself.
[snip]
> Nah, nothing like that. Cygcheck output show anything? Traces of v3
> remaining and interfering?
Bin
Yaakov (Cygwin Ports) wrote on 11 September 2008 12:18:
>> libgmp3, libmpfr1 - These may become statically linked in a future
>> version.
>
> Why bother?
Hence the "may". I don't plan to bother for myself, but it depends if I
start getting loads of " gcc doesn't seem to do anything and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Dave Korn wrote:
> Well, here it is at last. Experimental test release of GCC 4 series
> for Cygwin. Please be aware that this is highly experimental; anything
> built with it is not guaranteed to be forwardly-compatible with the
> eventual full r
René Berber wrote on 10 September 2008 23:29:
> Hi,
>
> Has anyone tested it?
Well, yeah :)
> Can't compile a simple test:
Can't reproduce:
/tmp/gcc4 $ cat test.c
int
main ()
{
;
return 0;
}
@___. .
( /"\
||--||(___)
'" '"'---'
/tmp/gcc4 $ gcc test.c ; echo $?
0
@
Brian Dessent wrote on 10 September 2008 23:44:
> René Berber wrote:
>
>> --enable-shared-libgcc --enable-__cxa_atexit --with-gnu-ld --with-gnu-as
>
> Err, that's not good. Cygwin does not support the __cxa_atexit
> extension, that's only a feature of glibc. This option should not be be
> used
Angelo Graziosi wrote on 10 September 2008 17:57:
> Dave Korn wrote:
>
>> Well, I could take a look at integrating it with update-alternatives for
>> the stable release.
>
> The best thing would be that one can install gfortran and g77 together,
> like on linux distributions.
I'll have suffix
René Berber wrote:
> --enable-shared-libgcc --enable-__cxa_atexit --with-gnu-ld --with-gnu-as
Err, that's not good. Cygwin does not support the __cxa_atexit
extension, that's only a feature of glibc. This option should not be be
used on libcs that don't provide the feature.
Brian
--
Unsubscri
Hi,
Has anyone tested it?
Can't compile a simple test:
$ cat test.c
int
main ()
{
;
return 0;
}
$ gcc test.c ; echo $?
1
$ gcc -v test.c
Using built-in specs.
Target: i686-pc-cygwin
Configured with: /gnu/gcc/release/gcc4-4.3.0-1/src/gcc-4.3.0/configure
--srcdir=/gnu/gcc/release/gcc4-4.3.0
NightStrike wrote on 10 September 2008 19:22:
> Multilib support is there. The only holdup is getting people to agree
> on pathnames for the 32-bit and 64-bit variant of lib directories (ie,
> use lib and lib32, or lib and lib64... I think someone even suggested
> no lib and just lib32 and lib64.
NightStrike wrote on 10 September 2008 19:22:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Christopher Faylor
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 01:53:45PM -0400, NightStrike wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 7:15 AM, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, here it is at last.
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Christopher Faylor
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 01:53:45PM -0400, NightStrike wrote:
>>On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 7:15 AM, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Well, here it is at last. Experimental test release of GCC 4 series
>>> for Cygw
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> NightStrike wrote on 10 September 2008 18:54:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 7:15 AM, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Well, here it is at last. Experimental test release of GCC 4 series
>>> for Cygwin. Please be aware
NightStrike wrote on 10 September 2008 18:54:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 7:15 AM, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Well, here it is at last. Experimental test release of GCC 4 series
>> for Cygwin. Please be aware that this is highly experimental; anything
>
> Dave,
>
> I've been buildin
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 01:53:45PM -0400, NightStrike wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 7:15 AM, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Well, here it is at last. Experimental test release of GCC 4 series
>> for Cygwin. Please be aware that this is highly experimental; anything
>
>I've been buildin
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 7:15 AM, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, here it is at last. Experimental test release of GCC 4 series
> for Cygwin. Please be aware that this is highly experimental; anything
Dave,
I've been building and releasing gcc 4.3 and gcc 4.4 toolchains to
cross com
Dave Korn wrote:
Well, I could take a look at integrating it with update-alternatives for the
stable release.
The best thing would be that one can install gfortran and g77 together,
like on linux distributions.
Thanks,
Angelo.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-s
Angelo Graziosi wrote on 10 September 2008 17:18:
> Dave Korn wrote:
>
>> --
>>
>> WARNING: You must uninstall any existing
>> gcc version 3 before installing this
>> package. This will need to be done
>> manually using setup.exe.
>>
>> -
Dave Korn wrote:
--
WARNING: You must uninstall any existing
gcc version 3 before installing this
package. This will need to be done
manually using setup.exe.
--
[...]
YOU MUST UNINSTALL GCC-
30 matches
Mail list logo
