On 16-Oct-2000, Earnie Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Chris Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 09:51:11AM -0700, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> > >
> > >The -mno-cygwin switch of the Cygwin product is not considered MinGW by
> > >the MinGW development team. MinGW has it's own set of GCC/binutils
> > >tools. We are currently in the process of preparing a more upto date
> > >package.
OK, I have some follow-up questions:
- Is there much difference between the two?
- Is there an official name for the `-mno-cygwin' option of Cygwin?
"The -mno-cygwin switch of the Cygwin product" is a bit wordy.
(Perhaps it should be called "Clayton's Cygwin" ;-)
- Cygwin and "Cygwin -mno-cygwin" are sufficiently different that
I think it would make sense for them to have different autoconf
canonical system names -- after all, Mingw has a different name,
and "Cygwin -mno-cygwin" is closer to Mingw than to Cygwin.
Currently autoconf seems to configure as "i*86-pc-cygwin",
even if you invoke configure as "CC='gcc -mno-cygwin' ./configure".
Should it configure report the host system type as "i*86-pc-mingw"
in that situation? Or should we invent a new name for that?
If so, what should it be?
--
Fergus Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
