On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 04:03:32PM -0700, Michael Rogers wrote: >Sorry Yaakov. I didn't mean to be annoying. You've been very helpful. > >I'll work on it tonight and send you more info tonight or tomorrow when >I have it available. Basically all I meant by "not viable" was that >the executibles aren't working. If the makefile procedure for building >a library will work here and that's the right thing to do, that's >great. Hopefully, I haven't been chasing a red herring. I had been >assuming that I needed to use the linker to resolve everything when you >built up the library, since that's the way you do it for DLLs. The >problem must be something else entirely. It's probably just that I'm >not resolving everything when I try to link with the executible, or >it's passing some pointer variable wrong or something like that. I'll >try to send more helpful info on my next email, if I haven't already >figured the problem out myself.
I hope that the helpful info will verify that you understand that you don't use gcc to produce a static library. It isn't clear that you grokked that one. cgf -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/ FAQ: http://x.cygwin.com/docs/faq/
