Re: libtool: cygwin/mingw/pw update: enable-auto-image-base

[Charles Wilson]

Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> First, please excuse the cross-post to two mailing lists (and the long
> lines).  As the mingw-users list is not writable for non-members, you
> may want to remove it in followup posts.
[ mingw-users removed]

> Are there any issues with this patch?  Maybe with respect to cross
> compilation?  Can we assume this to work on supported mingw/cygwin
> installations?  Does this patch change the necessity for relinking
> upon installation in any way (maybe under some circumstances)? I
> believe not, and CVS HEAD should not be relinking at all anyway.

I think the answers to all of these questions are the desired ones. [No, 
no, yes, no], with regards to cygwin and cross-to-cygwin-target systems.

> So, is there any reason I should not commit this to Libtool CVS HEAD and
> similarly to branch-1-5?

Not from the cygwin POV.  It was the considered judgement of the cygwin 
developers that this change was desirable, in that it HELPED to correct 
(but did not entirely eliminate) a problem with DLL relocations after 
fork()/exec().  Plus, it did no harm, as far as we could tell:

"Observation for ALL maintainers who provide dlls (was Re: question for 
perl maintainer)"
http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2005-07/msg00124.html
(Note that I made a statement in this thread that was wrong; the error 
was corrected in http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-apps/2005-07/msg00134.html)

"enable-auto-image-base with libtool not working"
http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2005-07/msg00749.html

My only concern was that the change applies equally to mingw and not 
just to cygwin, so I wanted Earnie's OK -- which he gave here:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool-patches/2005-09/msg00040.html

--
Chuck