Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin-developers=delorie DOT com AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>,
	<http://sourceware.cygnus.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
Message-ID:	<19990823122111.13323.rocketmail@web107.yahoomail.com>
Date:	Mon, 23 Aug 1999 05:21:10 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
Reply-To:	earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com
Subject:	Re: libcygwin.a as a symbolic link to lib{c,m}.a -- need insight
To:	cygwin developers <cygwin-developers AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0

--- Mumit Khan <khan AT xraylith DOT wisc DOT EDU> wrote:
> I vote for linking both libc.a and libm.a to libcygwin.a. In the future,
> we should probably use -lc in gcc config files as well, but that's not
> something we need to think about right now.

Hmm.  In the past if libcygwin.a was listed multiple times in the library link
list it caused problems.  Is this still true?  If it is then isn't symlinking
the libraries going to cause the same kind of problems?  I foresee more
problems with symlinks than with dummy place holder files.

===
Earnie Boyd <mailto:earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>

Newbies, please visit
<http://www.freeyellow.com/members5/gw32/index.html>

(If you respond to the list, then please don't cc me)
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com

- Raw text -