This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Documentation on -mno-cygwin Accuracy
On Wed, Feb 08, 2012 at 10:03:24AM -0600, Jeremy Bopp wrote:
>On 02/08/2012 09:49 AM, Jesse Ziser wrote:
>> On 2/7/2012 11:58 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 05:14:59PM -0600, Jesse Ziser wrote:
>>>> If you really want Mingw (a free compiler and development environment
>>>> for Windows), maybe what you should do is just download and install
>>>> Mingw, and use that, instead of doing it through the Cygwin compiler
>>>> using a barely-supported option. (Then you should get help with any
>>>> problems you have over at Mingw's website instead of here.)
>>> The MinGW cross-compiles are not "barely supported". They are included
>>> in the distribution precisely so that people can build pure-windows
>>> programs under Cygwin.
>> Oh? Then I got the wrong impression from the documentation and the
>> mailing list when I was trying to work all that out a few years ago. I
>> can't find it now, but I could swear there was something about it being
>> "deprecated" or "partially supported" or something.
>I think there is a tiny misunderstanding here. I believe that Jesse was
>talking about the -mno-cygwin option when he spoke of "using a
>barely-supported option". Chris seems to have misinterpreted that to
>mean that MinGW cross-compilers themselves were claimed to be
I was not misinterpreting. I was responding to the language.
Instructing someone to go elsewhere when we have a perfectly usable set
of tools which do exactly what's required is wrong.
And, given that this fact has already been made clear in this very
mailing list within the past several days, the advice really didn't make
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple