From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13934 invoked by alias); 14 Aug 2009 20:26:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 13901 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Aug 2009 20:26:42 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com (HELO out1.smtp.messagingengine.com) (66.111.4.25) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 20:26:32 +0000 Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.internal [10.202.2.41]) by gateway1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4428255265 for ; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 16:26:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 14 Aug 2009 16:26:30 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.3] (user-0c6sbc4.cable.mindspring.com [24.110.45.132]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A3C4F399A0; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 16:26:29 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4A85C871.7050106@cwilson.fastmail.fm> Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 20:26:00 -0000 From: Charles Wilson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.22) Gecko/20090605 Thunderbird/2.0.0.22 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com Subject: Re: GCC4, new package soon? References: <20090813083945.GH13438@calimero.vinschen.de> <4A842996.3050108@gmail.com> <4A850F1E.2030707@users.sourceforge.net> <4A8562EA.5010504@gmail.com> <4A85A745.4050003@users.sourceforge.net> <4A85B39D.3000502@gmail.com> <4A85C2AA.1080105@cwilson.fastmail.fm> <20090814200705.GA10492@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> In-Reply-To: <20090814200705.GA10492@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-talk-owner@cygwin.com Reply-To: The Vulgar and Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk List Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com X-SW-Source: 2009-q3/txt/msg00053.txt.bz2 Christopher Faylor wrote: > On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 04:01:46PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: >> [snip] >> There are a ton of things wrong with this behavior, but it is what it is >> -- and somehow we need to work around it, until libtool is "fixed". >> Whatever "fixed" means. > > find / -name 'libtool*' -o -name 'lt*' | xargs rm Ouch. Harsh. At the risk of having a technical discussion on the talk list, I wonder what the ramifications would be of just not shipping .la files for the gcc runtime libs? It's possible that this would "trick" libtool into just recording -lstdc++ etc, instead of canonicalizing to /full/path/to/libstdc++.la. Just a thought. -- Chuck