Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
X-Injected-Via-Gmane:	http://gmane.org/
Path:	not-for-mail
From:	Charles Wilson <cwilson AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu>
Newsgroups:	gmane.os.cygwin
Subject:	Re: Available for test: gcc-3.1.1-1, gcc2-2.95.3-6, and gcc-mingw-3_1-20020516-1
Date:	Tue, 09 Jul 2002 11:54:55 -0400
Lines:	40
Message-ID:	<3D2B074F.3040706@ece.gatech.edu>
References:	<E17RqcC-00052T-00 AT bentley DOT asa DOT co DOT uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	1cust30.tnt20.atl4.da.uu.net
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	main.gmane.org 1026230039 4451 63.59.255.30 (9 Jul 2002 15:53:59 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	usenet AT main DOT gmane DOT org
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Tue, 9 Jul 2002 15:53:59 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2
X-Accept-Language:	en-us

Paul Butcher wrote:

> 
> Can I put another vote in for this one - 


No.  :-)

> the lack of objC in recent cygwin 
> gcc builds has been a real problem forcing people to use the mingw gcc.  I've 
> recently compiled gcc V3.1 with cygwin including objC with no problem so 
> there doesn't seem to be much "support" needed.  The size added to the 
> overall package is negligable, certainly compared to F77 which probably ought 
> to be separately packaged, like ADA.
> 
> (It works even better if you replace the libobjc with that from GNUstep as 
> this allows DLLs and makes the runtime a DLL.)
> 
> Otherwise well done for getting gcc 3.x into cygwin build at last - look 
> forward to the fully released version when ready.  Will be interesting if you 
> can get libgcj working too as you're currently trying to do.


It's too early to worry about ADDITIONAL front ends.  Let's make sure 
that the CURRENT front ends provided by gcc-2.95.3-5 will not be BROKEN 
  by an upgrade to the cygwin-special gcc-3.1.1.

That means gcc, g++ (maybe fortran), since ONLY those three front ends 
are provided by cygwin-special gcc-2.95.3-5.

After the bugs in THOSE frontends are squashed, then we can *talk* about 
additional frontends, but not until then.

(IMO, the current focus on libgcj/java frontend is misguided, for the 
same reasons...but hey, that's just my opinion)

--Chuck




--
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 -