RFC: Cygwin 64 bit?

Thomas Wolff towo@towo.net
Tue Jun 28 20:48:00 GMT 2011

Am 28.06.2011 22:32, schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
> On Jun 28 16:18, Charles Wilson wrote:
>> On 6/28/2011 4:02 PM, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2011-06-28 at 13:02 -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
>>>> Yaakov's already annoyed at me for the inequality between "standard" ABI
>>>> version numbers and our cygwin ones, which are sometimes different due
>>>> to historical accident or error, but we are now stuck with them.
>>> True to a certain extent, but there were other ways of handling it (e.g.
>>> why did libncursesw have to inherit the mess of libncurses/narrow?  It
>>> could have been 5 or 6 instead of 10).  We could even have the chance to
>>> undo some of this by starting from scratch with x64 if we wanted to.
>> With this, I agree -- mostly: if we go with Corinna's "combined package"
>> approach, then cygport (or other build system tools) will need the
>> ability to "repatch" and maybe even reautoconf between bitness
>> builds...icky...
>> Furthermore, on x64, there will only be one ncurses library and it will
>> support the wide interface (in addition to the narrow one).  E.g.
>> (64)ncurses will be a 64bit version of (32)ncursesw.
> Erm... btw., is there a way to say in less then 100 words why ncursesw
> can't be ncurses on 32 bit?
> Corinna
I guess because --enable-widec is a configure option of the upstream 
source package, and API functions have the same names in both versions, 
so they can't be merged.
See, however, the comment I'll write to that other thread in a minute 
(about clearw).

More information about the Cygwin-developers mailing list