This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: merging mingw and cygwin
- From: Danny Smith <danny_r_smith_2001 at yahoo dot co dot nz>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 08:08:27 +1000 (EST)
- Subject: Re: merging mingw and cygwin
> Like I said, try:
> mingw > gcc -dM -e -xc /dev/null
> cygwin > gcc -mno-cygwin -dM -E -xc /dev/null
> cygwin makes 73 defines, mingw makes 38. If a large project uses any of the
> cygwin defines, it will behave differently than if compiled with native mingw.
That's because you used gcc-3.2.3 with mingw (3.3.1 is still a release
candidate "over there") and gcc-3.3.1 with cygwin. I agree: A program
compiled with gcc-3.2.3 will be different than one compiled with 3.3.1.
So maybe you should harass the mingw list to update the release status of
gcc. On second thought, don't do that. I hear they are petty mean over
> As I said, this is just the tip of the iceberg - who knows what patches that
> mingw has made to gcc, ld, make, etc. which could affect the building and
> running of large win32 packages.
I do. So does Chris, So does anyone who cares to look. The diff for gcc and
binutils is not an iceberg.
> If the large packages built in mingw are tested via mingw, then mingw is the
> only real way to a 'proper' win32 executable. And the only way to truly
> emulate mingw32 would be by merging it.
Wrong. I can build binutils for mingw with cygwin gcc -mno-cygwin. It
is the same as the binutils that I build with mingw. I have built a mingw gcc
with cygwin gcc -mno-cygwin. AFAICT, it is the same as the gcc I build with native
mingw. I don't do it any more because I like to say that I can do a native
bootstrap of gcc for mingw (with the help of cygwin tools)
> > Maybe the MingW package in Cygwin needs to be updated, however, I fail
> > to see the need for a MINGW or NO_CYGWIN flavor aside from what
> > currently exists (i.e. -mno-cygwin).
> Because gcc is not the only place that has MINGW-isms in it; msys departs from
> the cygwin standard and handles certain things differently.
msys != mingw. mingw doesn't need msys. Cygwin provides a more complete
building and testing environment than does msys.
> In order
> to build MinGW packages right, the underlying tools have to work the same
> as well.
> MINGW and/or NO_CYGWIN simply wrap all of this up in a nice user friendly
cygwin is a nice user friendly package. I won't speak for mingw because
I have a personal bias.
http://search.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Search
- Looking for more? Try the new Yahoo! Search
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html