I think this is important enough to get a mention in the FAQ,
that having different versions of cygwin1.dll on the path, for
example in the cygwin directory, could easily cause various
miscellanous problems (like no executables, improper resizing
or applications) etc. Currently it just says you
- "gcc -E bla.c" doesn't work (cpp bla.c = same)
- "gcc -S bla.c" does work
- "/usr/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-cygwin/2.95.3-5/cpp0.exe bla.c" does work
Guess I've almost found it then, but why doesn't "cpp" work and full-path-to-real-cpp
does?
I'm tired, it's 05:25 :/,
B. Matthys.
--
Unsubscr
On Tue, Dec 25, 2001 at 04:39:06AM +0100, Syzop wrote:
>>cygcheck -c binutils
>>
>>will do the same thing.
>
>I should have known that:
>$ cygcheck --help
>Usage: cygcheck [OPTIONS] [program ...]
> -s, --sysinfo = system information (not with -k)
> -v, --verbose = verbose output (indented) (fo
On Tue, Dec 25, 2001 at 12:33:22AM +0100, Syzop wrote:
>Stephano Mariani wrote:
>> Have you installed binutils?
>
>Yes,
>
>$ cygcheck.exe -s|grep binutils
>binutils20011002-1
cygcheck -c binutils
will do the same thing.
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscrib
2001 7:14
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: gcc not producing executables
>
> Hi,
>
> guess this is a stupid question but I've no idea what could be wrong
> since gcc doesn't even say anything :(. I was trying to upgrade from ???
> (not too old) to the newest vers
Have you installed binutils?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf
Of Syzop
Sent: Monday, 24 December 2001 7:14
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: gcc not producing executables
Hi,
guess this is a stupid question but I've no idea what cou
Hi,
guess this is a stupid question but I've no idea what could be wrong
since gcc doesn't even say anything :(.
I was trying to upgrade from ??? (not too old) to the newest version and now gcc
stopped working, I then removed the whole c:\cygwin dir and reinstalled the newest
version, but still g
7 matches
Mail list logo
