On Sat, Jul 15, 2006 at 07:21:53AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: >According to Christopher Faylor on 6/4/2006 5:38 PM: >>I've added a libdl.a to the latest snapshot, however any project which >>relies on the existence of this library without checking to see if it >>exists is broken as far as portability is concerned. > >By doing so, you broke CVS libtool (which will someday become libtool >2.0). Now that libtool can find -ldl, but there is no dynamic library >behind it, libtool is now spitting out the following warning on every >attempt to create a dll that depends on libltdl:
What is a "dynamic library"? Do you mean a dll? How did libtool deal with libc.a, libm.a, etc.? FWIW, my level of caring about libtool issues is not very high so if there is a solution here, it's in libtool not in cygwin. I'm not going to make accommodations in cygwin because a tool which is supposed to "streamline" the building of libraries is too stupid to do it right. There doesn't have to be a one-to-one correspondence between the name of a library and a DLL so libtool really seems to be broken if it assuming that because there is a libdl.a there must also be a cygdl.dll. cgf -- 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/