Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date:	Wed, 10 Jan 2001 17:27:18 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: make -mno-win32 the gcc default?
Message-ID:	<20010110172717.A5504@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<20010110163107 DOT A4979 AT redhat DOT com> <3A5CDA12 DOT B7533F6C AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20010110170527 DOT B21342 AT volta DOT certicom DOT com> <3A5CDEA3 DOT CAB59B71 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Mime-Version:	1.0
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To:	<3A5CDEA3.CAB59B71@ece.gatech.edu>; from cwilson@ece.gatech.edu on Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 05:13:55PM -0500

I didn't see this in the Cygwin mailing list but the CYGWIN environment
variable controls the behavior of the Cygwin DLL.  GCC is not the Cygwin
DLL.

This has nothing to do with "cygwin" or "make".

So, Charles' suggestion is correct.

cgf

On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 05:13:55PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
>Sure.  'export CC="gcc -mwin32"' and 'export CXX="g++ -mwin32"' in your
>.bashrc
>
>
>Ashok Vadekar wrote:
>> 
>> Could the switch be controlled by a $CYGWIN keyword?  Then both modes could
>> be considered default wrt. the command line.  You would merely have to decide
>> how you wanted cygwin (make, really) to behave.
>> 
>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2001 at 04:54:26PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
>> > Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Earnie has been proposing this and I sort of like the idea but dread the
>> > > potential hue and cry that could result.
>> > >
>> >
>> > I also like the idea, but am terrified of the torrent of "It worked with
>> > gcc-2.95.2 and cygwin beta 1.1 [sic]" complaints.  Also I'm not sure
>> > that all of "my" packages are _WIN32 clean.  (For the most part, if they
>> > compiled -- I was happy.  I didn't look too closely beyond that.  I know
>> > that zlib and libpng are WIN32 clean 'cause I tested them with
>> > -mno-win32.  Dunno *for sure* about the rest).
>> >
>> > > So, is the hue and cry from the lack of WIN32 counterbalanced by potentially
>> > > easier UNIX porting?
>> >
>> > Ummm....yyyyeeessss....I think????
>> >
>> > --Chuck

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -