This is the mail archive of the
cygwin@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: cygwin not respecting --without-newlib?
- From: Nathanael Nerode <neroden at doctormoo dot dyndns dot org>
- To: Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 13:30:20 -0400
- Subject: Re: cygwin not respecting --without-newlib?
- References: <20020709175531.GA17920@doctormoo.dyndns.org> <200207091806.g69I6Vu04666@envy.delorie.com> <20020709181544.GA18076@doctormoo.dyndns.org> <20020713040909.GA14590@redhat.com>
On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 12:09:09AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 02:15:44PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
> >On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 02:06:31PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
> >>
> >> Cygwin *is* newlib. When you build the cygwin DLL (cygwin1.dll) it
> >> directly incorporates the newlib objects into it. So, you must always
> >> build newlib when you're building cygwin, and anything built for
> >> cygwin is being built for newlib.
> >
> >OK; I'm not sure this helps me. :-)
> >
> >Suppose you're building a combined tree targeting Cygwin. What should
> >it mean to specify --without-newlib?
> >
> >Should it mean "Don't build or use the newlib in the tree: use the
> >preinstalled Cygwin libraries, or the ones I specified with --with-libs
> >and --with-headers"?
> >
> >Should it simply be illegal, and result in an error message?
>
> If there is a newlib in the tree, cygwin will attempt to use it. Hence,
> --without-newlib should be illegal for a cygwin target.
>
> cgf
What if you're not building winsup, but are building gcc (or gdb, or
libstdc++-v3, etc.) for a cygwin target? Is this even possible?
--Nathanael
--
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/