Mail Archives: cygwin/2001/07/17/23:32:53
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 10:42:18PM -0400, Jonadab the Unsightly One wrote:
>RAM prices being what they are, static linking is arguably The Only
>Good Way to compile anything you want to distribute for use on
>Microsoft platforms.
I agree 100% with most of what was written here. In fact, I think it
might even be nice to add it to the documentation.
However, I do not agree that static linking is generally a universally
good idea for any platform. There are many advantages to shared
libraries -- especially when the shared libraries are guaranteed to
be backwards compatible.
>However, the purpose of Cygwin is to run Unixy stuff on Windows;
>producing software for general distribution is, AFAIK, a non-goal for
>the project. Not that I am intimately acquainted with the project's
>goals, but that's the sense I got from the claims made (and not made)
>on the website. This is unlike DJGPP, which definitely bills itself as
>a development environment for general use. Of course, there's no
>particular reason you can't use Cygwin to do something that wasn't its
>stated goal, but there's even less warrantee of fitness for purpose
>than the "we intend it but promise nothing" that you get if you use it
>for the intended goal.
Well, if you can run unix applications under Cygwin and the unix
application is intended to produce a general distribution, then Cygwin
would, by extension be intended for a general distribution.
However, the fact that the Cygwin DLL is required for programs that use
Cygwin shouldn't be too much of a surprise. Certain shared libraries
are needed on linux, too -- even when linking statically. Windows also
requires certain DLLs no matter how you link your program. Think of
Cygwin as one of those DLLs.
cgf
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -