RFC: Cygwin 64 bit?

Thomas Wolff towo@towo.net
Sat Jul 9 00:02:00 GMT 2011

Am 09.07.2011 00:41, schrieb Yaakov (Cygwin/X):
> On Fri, 2011-07-08 at 18:22 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> Doesn't that presuppose that every package maintainer would have to
>> modify their build scripts?  You can't just make this the default for ld
>> since not everyone who builds a program necessarily wants to put their
>> dll in .../lib64.
> Modifying cygport(1), cygport(5)s, and other build scripts in some
> fashion is inevitable for any of these solutions.  The only way to avoid
> that would be to not support multilib in any form.  Since it seems I've
> been outvoted on *that* point, the only question is finding which method
> of multilib support which is the least painful.
I share cgf's concerns here and your hint isn't comforting me. It would 
mean that any package maintainer would have to modify scripts or 
makefiles unless they use cygport - which not all do. Well, I don't 
anyway. This would be asking for trouble.
Please don't introduce cygport as mandatory through a backdoor.

More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list