----- Original Message -----
From: "Earnie Boyd" <earnie_boyd@...>
Sent: Wednesday, 5 March 2003 20:30
Subject: Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] [Fwd: Re: [Mingw-users] Creating .LIB static
libraries with MinGW?]
> Danny Smith wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Earnie Boyd" <earnie_boyd@...>
> > To: <mingw-dvlpr@...>
> > Sent: Wednesday, 5 March 2003 17:48
> > Subject: [MinGW-dvlpr] [Fwd: Re: [Mingw-users] Creating .LIB static
> > libraries with MinGW?]
> >>If users must distribute libgcc.a IMO we need a source package that
> >>builds just that. Is this easily obtainable?
> > Not really. Each libgcc.a is tied to the version of the compiler it
> > built with. Note that libgcc.a ends up in the compiler's directory,
> > in the user or tooldir lib path.
> > Danny
> So should we be making statements that C libraries are compatible with
> other compilers? It sounds as if it isn't since the libgcc.a is
> to support the library
Not always. I played around with this earlier when using g77-built
objects with other C compilers The most common requiremnt for libgcc.a
was to resolve _alloca or __chkstk.
libgcc.a's _chkstk.o for win32 is built from assembly (cygwin.asm) which
has no licence/copyright assertion .
Maybe mingw distro could just supply _chkstk.o (and src)
However, that may have changed. I think we need to get more info on
what symbols in libgcc.a are actually required for use by other
and supplying the libgcc.a means that you need to
> also supply the gcc source. How should we document building a library
> for use with other linkers? Should we warn that it shouldn't be done?
> Or should we just warn what is needed to do so, I.E.: you must also
> supply the gcc source?
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The
> for complex code. Debugging C/C++ programs can leave you feeling lost
> disoriented. TotalView can help you find your way. Available on major
> and Linux platforms. Try it free. http://www.etnus.com
> MinGW-dvlpr mailing list