Observation for ALL maintainers who provide dlls (was Re: question for perl maintainer)

[Charles Wilson]

Christopher Faylor wrote:

>>I vaguely remember somebody more knowledgeable (Danny?  cgf?  Mumit?) 
>>than I suggesting that --e-a-i-b was a bad default choice -- but I don't 
>>remember who or why, and I can't find it in the archives.
> 
> 
> I vaguely recall this, too.  I'm probably being terribly inconsistent by
> even suggesting it.  Is it possible that some DLL was defaulting to
> cygwin's default load address?


Robert Collins wrote:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool/2001-06/msg00073.html

"I've also uploaded a binutils src tarball with the modified ld. I've
modified it a little further to avoid some cygwin dll symbols it was
picking up by mistake. A patch for that against a recent binutils is
there as well. My patch also differs from Paul's original in that I've
left disabled the auto-image-base option, which can cause issues with
cygwin, due to a issue previously discussed. That option isn't part of
the auto-import logic and thus shouldn't be part of this discussion IMO.
(And should not be enabled by default!)."

(Later in the thread, I appear to have agreed with Robert; but it seems 
that it was because I agreed that the issue of getting "auto-import" 
into the binutils baseline was a separate issue from whether 
"auto-image-base" should be the default or not, and that those two 
issues should remain distinct.)

Still looking for the "issue previously discussed".

--
Chuck