This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: getopt: ugly linker messages
- From: "Ivan Warren" <ivan at vmfacility dot fr>
- To: <cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 03:34:37 +0200
- Subject: RE: getopt: ugly linker messages
> Are you not a native English speaker or are you just trolling now?
> This is what I said:
> "Apparently, no one knows the answer to your question and,
> apparently, no one is interested in researching the problem for you."
> In this context, it is clear what I was saying. I was saying
> that no one *else* wanted to *debug* your problem. I wasn't
> saying "You do it", even though, realistically speaking, that
> is probably your best alternative.
I was just trying to uncover a problem that I ran into so that others don't
run into it. I have a workaround, so I am not directly affected. So it is
not *my* problem per-se.
> (and now here comes another round of "I've already worked so
> hard and I don't know nothing about no binutils"...)
Obviously this is getting nowhere. I wasn't whining, I was just explaining
> >>You already posted to the binutils mailing list, remember?
> >Yeah.. Of course I do remember that.. (not senile yet ;-) ).. But
> >unfortunatelly, I made the same mistake I did here : I told them I
> >*DID* post in the other forum. Thus leading to the effect that each
> >list thinks it's a problem that is in the other group field of
> You're assuming here. This is obviously a binutils issue.
> The fact that no one responded to it, is very likely the same
> reason that no one responded here.
That is correct, this is one hypothesis. I reported a problem for which I am
not affected (because I have a workaround), but possibly noone is
interrested because it mainly affects the cygwin community. Yes.. I am
'assuming'.. But it's irrelevant. In either case the problem won't be fixed
and someone else, one day, will run into it.
> >So my option is now to tell the binutils folks that the cygwin folks
> >are declaring this issue to be a binutils core issue and that it has
> >nothing to do with cygwin (although it does affect it).. Am
> I correct
> I would assume that anyone in the binutils mailing list who
> saw errors with import libraries would not assume "Aha! It's
> obviously a problem with the Cygwin DLL! I don't have to
> worry about this one". So, anyone who was interested in this
> problem would already be clear on where the fault lies from
> your original message.
> Just to be clear: I do provide the binutils package to the
> cygwin community but I don't have the time or inclination to
> track the problem down. There are a few people reading the
> binutils mailing list who are more facile with the code than
> I. They are, of course, also volunteers.
I am also a volunteer..
I'll drop the subject. It was obviously a bad idea to report a problem which
could affect the cygwin community. Again, I have a workaround, so I can live
with it. The same goes for ld merging .data globals between DLLs which
obviously doesn't work.. There is a problem in that field, and I have a test
case. But I have a workaround so I'll just keep it to myself.
And well.. I think I was wrong in *assuming* that this mailing list dealt
with the cygwin project as a whole. It seems that if it's not a problem with
the cygwin dll itself, then it doesn't belong here.
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html