On 29 Nov 2001 at 15:18, Robert Collins wrote:
> ---- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul G." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >I'm still not 100% sure that utils is appropriate.
> > >
> > > Me neither.
> >
> > FWIW, Mingw doesn't have an extensive utils as part of base
> distribution. Even
> > so, you can download binutils as a separate enhancement from several
> sources.
>
> I always thought that mingw's aims were somewhat different to what
> cygwin is (now) trying to do.
Well, only in terms of targetted platform(s). Mingw is, as you have noted
below, meant to be run under (be
targetted primarily for) a Win32api based OS. Originally, Cygwin, (cgf, please
correct), was designed to be targetted for
Win32api based platforms and allow easy transition from *nix based platforms to
Win32API based platforms. Since
then, and if I understand current philosophy of Cygwin correctly, Cygwin has expanded
to be installable and useable on
both *nix (including Linux) and Win32api based platforms. Of course, the *nix users
don't have the benefit of setup.exe
<;-)>.
>
> mingw: a compiler targeted for win32, (usually) hosted on win32, with
> win32 binaries available.
Basically, yes. Most recent "stable" Mingw distribution (1.1) is more akin to
a tool set than it is to a compiler
though. (Basic "tool set", to me, includes compiler, binutils and whatever else is
needed to sucessfully build and/or
debug your basic executable such as "helloworld.exe". Cygwin and Mingw are both tool
sets. Environment-wise,
Cygwin is *nix oriented, Mingw is Windows or Win32api oriented). [you see twisty-turny
passages going in all
directions...;-) oops, showing my age ;-)]
> cygwin: every *nix opensource utility (and one or two win32) under the
> sun, available in binary form, along with a posix emulation layer to
> make it all work.
Yes, closer to a *nix-like development environment which runs under (is
targetted primarily for) the Win32api
based platforms.
>
> Please correct me if I'm wrong :}.
Paul G.
