This is the mail archive of the binutils@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the binutils project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: libiberty.a question

From: Andrew Hall <halla3 at corp dot earthlink dot net>
To: DJ Delorie <dj at redhat dot com>
Cc: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 16:08:45 -0400
Subject: Re: libiberty.a question
References: <1082403681.23053.26.camel@kuu.eng.atl.earthlink.net> <200404191947.i3JJlc8e012421@greed.delorie.com>

> > Why does this pkg contain the same library as GCC?
> 
> Why not?  Why re-invent it for each package that needs it?  GDB uses
> it also, as does cygwin and a few other packages.
I am no developer, but would it not be better to have libiberty in its
own pkg?  Or does each software tweak it?  Just curious.

> > Which on is the correct one to use?
> 
> The one that comes with the sources you're trying to build.  If you
> need to choose, choose the more recent one.

Do most ppl just forcefully overwrite the file?  ie. --force-overwrite
in dpkg?

Thanks for the *very* quick response!

Drew

Follow-Ups:
- Re: libiberty.a question
  - From: DJ Delorie

References:
- libiberty.a question
  - From: Andrew Hall
- Re: libiberty.a question
  - From: DJ Delorie

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]