Re: g++ (v.3.1.1-4) -mno-cygwin with a hello world sample crashes oddly

[Christopher Faylor <cgf@redhat.com>]

On Sun, Jul 21, 2002 at 10:48:40AM -0700, news@garydjones.mailshell.com wrote:
>On 21 Jul 2002, Christopher Faylor <cgf@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jul 21, 2002 at 08:00:48AM -0700, Randall R Schulz
>> wrote:
>
>>>When you use the "-c" option, you suppress the whole linking
>>>phase. The output, regardless of its extension, is not a
>>>binary executable
>[snip]
>> Wow, all of this traffic and Randall is the first, AFAICT,
>> to notice that someone was using the -c option incorrectly. 
>> When I did my test case, I actually correctly did not use
>> the -c option to try to create an executable and I never
>> noticed the cockpit error.
>
>The reason being that you were trying to reproduce a reported problem
>and failed to faithfully reproduce the conditions described.

Do you have a fun time stating the obvious?

>> There are something on the order of 22 messages in this
>> thread and it looks like only one person actually noticed
>> the obvious problem. 
>
>So obvious that you didn't comment on it in your original response?
>Since yours was the first reply, you could have saved 20 of those
>messages by doing so.

I DIDN'T NOTICE the -c.  What part of "I never noticed the cockpit error"
did you have problems with?

I was commending Randall on his insight.  It didn't occur to me that this
would be taken as YA reason to continue this dead thread.

Just to make it clear: I was no different than anyone else here,
apparently.  Maybe I was missing some confusion from people who thought
that executing an object file should have created an obvious error.
However, I was taking the bug report as something specifically wrong
with gcc 3.1.1 when it was just cygwin + gcc working as it always has.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/