Regarding the -no-undefined, yes I have verified that adding it back in makes curl build properly (with a DLL) under Cygwin. I'm not familiar enough with the wonders of libtool and the configure process to know if there's any other way to make it work.

If necessary, I'm willing to simply change that file every time I build a cygwin version of curl (I have to provide a customized source tarball anyways, so it's not much extra work).

If you decide to leave "-no-undefined" out, I'm going to want to change my cygwin-specific README file. So I'd be sending a small update for that as well.

Isn't there any way you could simply *define* each of the currently undefined things? And then reintroducing -no-undefined would be correct?

If no-one else on the list knows, I may be able to get some guidance from the folks on the cygwin developers mailing list. If I don't hear any resolution here in the next couple days I'll probably go down that route.

Regarding a 7.10.1, as I said I'd rather wait until a second "version" of 7.10 is released, whether that be 7.10, 7.10a, 7.10.1, or whatever, before building a cygwin version. It seems there have been a good number of build-time issues that have been fixed just recently... If you're hoping to avoid that, I can manually apply my needed changes, but I generally prefer to make as few changes like that as I can.

--Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Stenberg [mailto:daniel_at_haxx.se]
Sent: Fri 10/04/02 4:30 AM

On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Roth, Kevin P. wrote:
> @@ -19 +19 @@
> -libcurl_la_LDFLAGS = -version-info 2:2:0
> +libcurl_la_LDFLAGS = -no-undefined -version-info 2:2:0

Can you verify this somehow? I had to remove this in order for some people to
manage to build with OpenSSL shared libraries properly, since it contains
undefined symbols. I'd hate to make this option differ between platforms,
especially when I don't know exactly which platforms that want this and which
that don't want it! ;-(

> As I'm guessing a 7.10.1 will come out real soon (correct me if I'm
> wrong please),

I'm not so sure about that. I've received no really serious bug report on
7.10 as of yet, so I see no immediate reason to rush another release just
yet.

I think the reason might also be related to the fact that we currently have
no binary/install packages of 7.10 at all, which tend to make the
distribution more limited and thus less used.

-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
Received on 2002-10-04