OK, pushed. Thanks to all involved.
Evan
___
Chicken-hackers mailing list
Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 09:37:07PM +0200, Peter Bex wrote:
I've tested the patch, and it indeed seems to fix this particular
situation. Somehow I thought this would break dynamically linked
builds, as there's no libchicken.dll, only cygchicken-0.dll. However,
*somehow* dynamic binaries are
I've never understood this cygchicken-0.dll business. It's still being
built, and the core binaries are still linked against it. So I'm unsure
whether this patch is the Right Fix; I always assumed there was a reason
we had cygchicken-0.dll, and programs should be linked against it?
Peter Bex scripsit:
I've never understood this cygchicken-0.dll business. It's still being
built, and the core binaries are still linked against it. So I'm unsure
whether this patch is the Right Fix; I always assumed there was a reason
we had cygchicken-0.dll, and programs should be linked
On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 01:47:03PM +0200, Felix Winkelmann wrote:
From: Michele La Monaca mikele.chic...@lamonaca.net
Subject: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] fix static compilation in cygwin
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 14:57:17 +0200
Hi,
I think static compilation is broken in cygwin because csc
From: Michele La Monaca mikele.chic...@lamonaca.net
Subject: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] fix static compilation in cygwin
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 14:57:17 +0200
Hi,
I think static compilation is broken in cygwin because csc
inexplicably (to me at least) looks for cygchicken-0.a instead
Hi,
I think static compilation is broken in cygwin because csc
inexplicably (to me at least) looks for cygchicken-0.a instead of
libchicken.a.
Regards,
Michele
0001-fix-static-compilation-in-cygwin.patch
Description: Binary data
___
Chicken-hackers