From:	raf AT comdyn DOT com DOT au (raf)
Subject:	Re: I: gcc ... -U_WIN32 ... may cause problems
10 Sep 1998 05:12:06 -0700 :
Message-ID:	<199809090733.RAA02314.cygnus.gnu-win32@mali.comdyn.com.au>
To:	gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com

Earnie wrote:

>---Mumit Khan <khan AT xraylith DOT wisc DOT edu> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 31 Aug 1998, Geoffrey Noer wrote:
>> 
>> > 
>> > Perhaps -Dunix should be added to the define list whenever
>> > __CYGWIN32__ is defined?  Linux includes -Dunix and
>-Asystem(posix) in
>> > CPP_PREDEFINES (looking at gcc/config/i386/linux.h).
>> > 
>> 
>> I see no problem in cygwin32 specs defining "unix", but I have yet to
>> see a good argument for getting rid of _WIN32 from x86-win32 targets,
>> especially from mingw32.
>> 

>The `argument' I have for removing the _WIN32 from cygwin32 (I'll live
>with mingw32) is that there exists code that already has some porting
>to WIN32 and it gets in the way of wanting to build the __UNIX__
>version under WIN32.  Since this is the goal of the Cygnus Project
>then it would be best served to remove the definitions of _WIN32.

<opinion>
but what if someone *wants* to compile the win32 version with gcc?
what's wrong with that?

the problem is that these applications of which you speak can't
tell the difference between win32-only, unix-only and unix-plus-win32.
they really should (sooner or later).

so a better plan is to make the appropriate changes to each of these
applications and send patches back to their authors.

what you suggest condones/supports ignorance of the cygwin32 platform
on the part of software developers. who does that serve?
</opinion>

raf

-
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 -