Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>Isn't -print-prog-name supposed to give the full path, or do I have an
>>installation problem? Note that the native gcc (2.95.4) does not
>>produce a full path either?
>
> It is supposed to provide the full path. I suspect you have something
> installed incorrectly, like maybe ld is missing from i686-pc-cygwin/bin
Arg. Yes:
19:36:40 fred@peder:/home/cygwin/cygwin-1.3.10/linux-x-cygwin/usr
$ ls -l i686-pc-cygwin/bin/ld*
-rwxr-xr-x 3 fred staff 1683668 Apr 22 19:15
i686-pc-cygwin/bin/ld-in-path-breaks-libtool
So, I'll recheck my expert advice to you that LD should be set, now
that I you helped me fix this issue:
i686-pc-cygwin-gcc -print-prog-name=ld
/home/cygwin/cygwin-1.3.10/linux-x-cygwin/usr/bin/../lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-cygwin/2.95.3-5/../../../../i686-pc-cygwin/bin/ld
[... goes and tests before mailing] and indeed, the setting of LD is
bogus. I'm very sorry about this. You may remove that addition.
> If the above is true, then the cross version of gcc is using the
> linux (or whatever) version of ld. That's clearly wrong.
It probably wasn't, because I set LD, (the wrong ld simply doesn't
work), but still.
> So, to be clear: If i686-pc-cygwin-gcc is not returning a full path,
> you have an installation problem. You should fix that.
It seems however, that gcc will only print the full path, if the
program (ld in this case) is not already in the path.
Greetings,
Jan.
--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien | http://www.lilypond.org
