Mail Archives: cygwin/2004/03/25/20:22:19
At 07:59 PM 3/25/2004, you wrote:
>At 07:33 PM 3/25/2004, Tom Roche wrote:
>> While sounding out Cygwin users in my organization, I got the
>> comment:
>
>> > If Cygwin would run under Wine, I'd be a very happy person, we
>> > wouldn't need real Windows machines for builds, and we could
>> > consign all our Windows build machines, their ITSC compliance, and
>> > the continual stream of updates and security fixes to the deepest
>> > pits of hell.
>
>Larry Hall 03/25/2004 07:45:39 PM:
>> I'm not sure I see the logic in the comment from which the question
>> stems. If the goal is to avoid using Windows platforms for builds,
>> why isn't a cross-compiler targeting Windows enough?
>
>For one thing, in these modern times, building usually also involves
>some smoke-, unit- or function-test (i.e. "build verification test").
>
>As far as the administrative desirability of running an emulator vs
>running native: this may be an organizational peculiarity, but IIRC
>the same requirements don't apply.
So are you saying that it's not a requirement that your build environment
running under Wine be able to run smoke/unit/function tests but it would
be for a cross-compiler environment would? Yikes! OK, maybe I
misunderstood what you're saying with the above but if that's
the case, it seems to me that the bigger concern should be "will the
software built under Wine run under Wine"? Unless you know that's the case,
you're putting the cart before the horse. And, as I type this, I have
the strangest feeling of deja-vu, like this is exactly the same comment
that was made the last time this subject came up. ;-)
--
Larry Hall http://www.rfk.com
RFK Partners, Inc. (508) 893-9779 - RFK Office
838 Washington Street (508) 893-9889 - FAX
Holliston, MA 01746
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -