From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26179 invoked by alias); 14 Aug 2009 20:29:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 26144 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Aug 2009 20:29:17 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ey-out-1920.google.com (HELO ey-out-1920.google.com) (74.125.78.148) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 20:29:11 +0000 Received: by ey-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 13so368842eye.20 for ; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 13:29:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.210.62.4 with SMTP id k4mr3719524eba.25.1250281748178; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 13:29:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?192.168.2.99? (cpc2-cmbg8-0-0-cust61.cmbg.cable.ntl.com [82.6.108.62]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 10sm1094995eyz.51.2009.08.14.13.29.07 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 14 Aug 2009 13:29:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A85CC3F.8080804@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 20:29:00 -0000 From: Dave Korn User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: The Vulgar and Unprofessional Cygwin-Talk Rampaging List 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> <4A85C871.7050106@cwilson.fastmail.fm> In-Reply-To: <4A85C871.7050106@cwilson.fastmail.fm> 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/msg00054.txt.bz2 Charles Wilson wrote: > 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? Libtool will summon Moth-Ra to destroy Tokyo. Happy now? cheers, DaveK