RE: Up-to-date info on '-mno-cygwin' vs. Mingw32

["David Carter" <david at carter dot net>]

Jesper Eskilson wrote:
> According to the FAQ, support for the -mno-cygwin flag "has been weak
>and flaky, [...] and maintenance of the option has *not* been a
>priority in development", 

I would tend to agree with this.

>and the FAQ recommends that one uses a
>separate MingW compiler set. Is this accurate?

I would differ here. gcc & binutils in cygwin seem to be updated to
track new gnu releases more quickly. Cygwin also provides a much richer
build environment than does mingw.

While you could use the mingw compiler & linker with cygwin, as
recommended by some on the web, by placing them ahead of the cygwin
tools in your path, you are almost certain to run into issues with
dos/windows file paths vs. unix-style paths.

Here's what I recommend:
- use the cygwin tools, passing -mno-cygwin to the compiler (& linker? I
do it to be sure, but not sure if it's required)
- use the mingw headers & libraries -- download them from mingw, and
copy or symlink them into your cygwin /usr/include/mingw and
/usr/lib/mingw directory trees. This is absolutely required if you're
doing anything with c++ that you want to run on win32 without the
cygwin1.dll

I've build some fairly complex c++ programs, libraries, and frameworks
using this approach. I've been very satisfied with the results, and with
the great build tools available on cygwin, such as gnu make, autoconf,
automake, etc.

---
David Carter
david@carter.net




--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/