Nick Hudson wrote:
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Mar 6, 2001, Bryce McKinlay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps it would suffice to simply clear "wl" when entering the
incremental mode, assuming we know the linker will always be called
directly when doing incremental.
Yep.
Bruce Korb writes:
Is there supposed to be a way to tell GCC/collect2/ld to
let me supply my own _init and _fini routines?
ld -init NAME -fini NAME
Or, am I required to have a pre-determined external name that I must
reference? If so, what is the point of _init? *sigh*.
Actually, if you
Hi Bruce,
On Friday 09 March 2001 5:15 pm, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Korb writes:
Is there supposed to be a way to tell GCC/collect2/ld to
let me supply my own _init and _fini routines?
ld -init NAME -fini NAME
Or, am I required to have a pre-determined external name that I must
Hi Edward,
Your patch is brilliant. Thankyou. I need to build a cygwin installation
before I can test it, but by inspection it looks fine to me. This stuff is
all I have left on my Libtool TODO list: As soon as we have it committed,
I'd like to make a candidate release for libtool-1.4 so
On Sat, Mar 10, 2001 at 04:08:14AM +, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
Your patch is brilliant. Thankyou.
Ditto. This patch is much appreciated. Thank you, Edward.
cgf
___
Libtool mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mar 9, 2001, Bryce McKinlay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My preferred solution is for libtool to stop doing silly tests!
Agreed.
(there has never been a GCJ that doesn't support "-c -o"), but don't
think Oliva liked that idea. Ideally we could put a flag in
ltcf-gcj.sh that tells it not to
