From:	fjh AT cs DOT mu DOT OZ DOT AU (Fergus Henderson)
Subject:	Re: Default compiler behaviour for b19
10 Sep 1997 03:06:30 -0700 :
Approved:	cygnus DOT gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com
Distribution:	cygnus
Message-ID:	<199709091449.AAA01288.cygnus.gnu-win32@mundook.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
References:	<199709091041 DOT DAA19490 AT rtl DOT cygnus DOT com>
Original-To:	gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com
Original-Sender:	owner-gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com

Geoffrey Noer <noer AT cygnus DOT com> writes:

>Anthony Wesley wrote:
>> 
>> Perhaps I am misreading the comments on the gnuwin32 home page, but it
>> looks like Cygnus are proposing to have "gcc -o foo foo.c" generate
>> native win32 binaries by default and not link with cygwin.dll. To
>> compile UNIX-ish tools and link with the cygwin.dll library you will
>> have to supply an extra command line option.
>
>Yes, and this may still happen at some point down the road.

I have to agree with Anthony Wesley that this would be a Bad Idea.

>Perhaps, it depends on whether the goal is a Unix compiler running under
>Win32 or a Win32 compiler running under Win32 with a Unix compatibility
>option...

.... or both.
Having `gcc' behave in this way makes sense only if the first
goal is totally abandoned.  But I don't see why we can't have both.
The second goal is not particularly important to me, but if you want
it, then surely the sensible thing would be to have two different commands
(even if one is just a shell script that invokes the other with
an certain option set).  `gcc' should be the unix compatible version.
Some other name should be chosen for the Win32 compiler.

--
Fergus Henderson <fjh AT cs DOT mu DOT oz DOT au>   |  "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>   |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger fjh AT 128 DOT 250 DOT 37 DOT 3         |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request AT cygnus DOT com" with one line of text: "help".

- Raw text -