This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] New experimental package: gcc4-4.3.0-1


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Dave Korn wrote:
>   :)  If so, I will submit upstream.  Actually I think I can probably do it
> all with the hooks and overrides, but I haven't got up-to-date with the
> prep_gnu_info changes yet ...

In that case, you know where to find me. :-)

>   That's all I get from a default build, I'm not sure if --disable-libjava is
> the upstream default right now but knowing the somewhat sorry state of libjava
> on cygwin I wouldn't be surprised.  (I'll give it a go and if anything manages
> to compile, I'll ship it.)

Perhaps when you have the next release with a standard cygport,

>   Because I didn't use libtool to do it.  I think Aaron's patch to build
> libgcc shared from upstream does it properly, so I'll be adopting it if I can,
> otherwise I'll just crudely bodge it in.

Since the name of the libgcc dll is manually specified in
gcc/config/i386/{cygwin.h,t-cygwin}, isn't it just a matter of changing
those to cyggcc_s-1.dll?  Or am I missing something?

>   Didn't look at fortran and objc.

Presuming that F95 and ObjC/ObjC++ don't have the problem with overrides
that C++ has, it should be as simple as adding the -no-undefined flag.

>   The problem with making shared libstdc - it can be done - is that it shows
> regressions, because win32 doesn't currently fully support the semantics of
> weak symbols like ELF does.  Specifically, since a DLL has to be
> fully-resolved when it is linked, any references to e.g. operators new/delete
> get statically resolved as internal calls within the DLL, and then when you
> attempt to define a custom operator new/delete override within your
> executable, it doesn't get interposed between the already-resolved calls and
> their destinations within the DLL.
> 
>   This would make the C++ compiler non-compliant, so as it all works OK with a
> static library, I'm shipping it that way for now.
> 
>   I plan to work on improving weak symbol support in binutils to resolve this
> problem in the long run; I think we can make it work with a little bit of
> thunk stubbery[*].

I think I get the picture; helping to figure that out is beyond me.

>   ? dunno.  That's a whole nother story, isn't it?

I suppose so.  Definitely not urgent, just curious.


Yaakov
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEAREIAAYFAkjKH4EACgkQpiWmPGlmQSMuugCeOFPWFs0INxU540XaPYFgnFt0
gEQAoPckVVyAYmNM+rCP30qzfrmUOvOt
=xgq0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]