Charles Wilson wrote:
Another alternative -- slightly more general (don't include the "." char, and take advantage of the fact that we only check the first N characters of the name).Oops. Previous patch still left a chunk of Egor's changes. New patch replaces.
How about submitting the patch to the binutils mailing list?
I've no objections -- but the patch is a workaround for a cygwin-specific packaging decision (e.g. providing gcc-2.95.3 as "gcc-2" and renaming the runtime libs accordingly).
Is that something that should go into the "real" binutils CVS, or should it be kept in the cygwin binutils package only?
--Chuck
Index: pe-dll.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/ld/pe-dll.c,v
retrieving revision 1.45
diff -u -r1.45 pe-dll.c
--- pe-dll.c 6 Nov 2002 19:36:20 -0000 1.45
+++ pe-dll.c 9 Nov 2002 18:28:56 -0000
@@ -228,12 +229,12 @@
/* Do not specify library suffix explicitly, to allow for dllized versions. */
static autofilter_entry_type autofilter_liblist[] =
{
- { "libgcc.", 7 },
- { "libstdc++.", 10 },
- { "libmingw32.", 11 },
- { "libg2c.", 7 },
- { "libsupc++.", 10 },
- { "libobjc.", 8 },
+ { "libgcc", 6 },
+ { "libstdc++", 9 },
+ { "libmingw32", 10 },
+ { "libg2c", 6 },
+ { "libsupc++", 9 },
+ { "libobjc", 7 },
{ NULL, 0 }
};
-- 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/
