-lc == -lcygwin in the next release?

Chris Faylor cgf@cygnus.com
Wed May 12 09:50:00 GMT 1999

On Wed, May 12, 1999 at 09:26:02AM -0400, Larry Hall wrote:
>At 05:57 PM 5/11/99 -0500, Mumit Khan wrote:
>>On Tue, 11 May 1999, Chris Faylor wrote:
>>> Does anyone mind if I get rid of libcygwin.a in the next release
>>> and just call it libc.a?  Then when it is copied to /whatever/lib
>>> it will work correctly when it is used on a command line.
>>I just suggested something similar in a post to cygwin list. The current 
>>situation causes gratuitous problems that can be solved by simply either
>>linking libcygwin.a to libc.a or renaming libcygwin.a to libc.a. Either
>>way, please please remove the newlib libc.a.
>I like the idea of renaming the .a but leaving a symlink to libcygwin.a.
>This makes the "inadvertent" use of -lc work as expected but clues in 
>anyone developing cygwin that libcygwin.a maps to libc.a.  I think that
>would help avoid confusion for everyone without adding a stitch of

I would like to remove the libcygwin.a entirely.  I don't see any reason
for it.  You don't have a 'liblinux.a' on linux.  libcygwin.a is really
just libc.a.

If we make a symlink then we'll be getting reports that linking libcygwin.a
from MSVC doesn't work correctly.


More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list