Re: gcc4 outstanding issues (was Re: Cygport woes: CHOST not defined.)

[Charles Wilson <cygwin at cwilson dot fastmail dot fm>]

On 3/18/2011 5:06 AM, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> BTW, I wonder if we can begin mitigating (2) by not shipping the .la
> files with GCC.  This would stop those paths from being hardcoded into
> other .la files, so that eventually only the libtool scripts will need
> to be fixed.

Yes, please.  I think this should be done, upstream (4.7?), as well.
There is no need for runtime libraries to have .la files IMO -- having
them needlessly complicates, and provides no benefit (is it even
supported, by gcc-devs, to dlopen/ltopen a runtime library, on all
platforms?)

--
Chuck

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple