Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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 List <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	Re: Using -mno-cygwin flag
Mail-Copies-To:	never
Reply-To:	sds AT gnu DOT org
X-Attribution:	Sam
X-Disclaimer:	You should not expect anyone to agree with me.
From:	Sam Steingold <sds AT gnu DOT org>
In-Reply-To:	<6.2.1.2.0.20050504130201.03c80150@pop.prospeed.net> (Larry Hall's message of "Wed, 04 May 2005 13:02:44 -0400")
References:	<20050504091922 DOT GD7475 AT monster DOT octa4 DOT net> <42789D45 DOT 6F74436D AT dessent DOT net> <u1x8nyltl DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <6 DOT 2 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 0 DOT 20050504130201 DOT 03c80150 AT pop DOT prospeed DOT net>
Mail-Followup-To:	Cygwin List <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Date:	Wed, 04 May 2005 13:32:19 -0400
Message-ID:	<uu0liyk0s.fsf@gnu.org>
User-Agent:	Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (windows-nt)
MIME-Version:	1.0

> * Larry Hall <yu-ab-crefbany-ercyvrf-cyrnfr AT pltjva DOT pbz> [2005-05-04 13:02:44 -0400]:
>
> At 12:53 PM 5/4/2005, you wrote:
>>> * Brian Dessent <oevna AT qrffrag DOT arg> [2005-05-04 03:00:37 -0700]:
>>>
>>> -mno-cygwin does not just "make things that doesn't depend on the
>>> cygwin DLL", it removes Cygwin from the equation entirely.
>>
>>this is very unfortunate, actually.
>>things like berkeley-db, postgresql, pcre &c all have a native win32
>>port, and it it a pity that -mno-cygwin does not use them.
>
> That's something to take up with the MinGW folks (www.mingw.org).

I am not quite clear on the exact relationship between cygwin and MinGW
project (I assumed that they are independent except that cygwin includes
parts of MinGW).  Why would I want to talk to them?

I think that cygwin should include the native ports of packages for
which such ports exist - as a matter of policy.
Of course, it is probably up to the individual package maintainer how
to build the package, so, e.g., I could lobby Ronald to build the
native PCRE version...

Here is the rationale:

Supposed I am developing several different programs:
<A>: just my own C code, compiled with "gcc -mno-cygwin"
<B>: my own C + PCRE: I could compile it with "gcc -mno-cygwin", but
     PCRE requires cygwin - for no technical reason because actually
     PCRE compiles under win32 natively, without cygwin
<C>: my own C + PCRE + X: there is no way to build it without cygwin,
     because there is no native w32 port of X

Thus right now I can build a native w32 version of <A> but only cygwin
versions of <B> and <C>.
I want to be able to build a native w32 version of <B> also.

To do that, I must install _also_ MinGW - with its idiosyncratic
installation system &c.

Note that I cannot switch to MinGW completely because it does not
support X, so I am either stuck with <B> using cygwin (for no technical
reason), or with two separate independent development systems (Cygwin
and MinGW).

Thanks.

-- 
Sam Steingold (http://www.podval.org/~sds) running w2k
<http://pmw.org.il/> <http://www.camera.org> <http://www.jihadwatch.org/>
<http://www.openvotingconsortium.org/> <http://www.memri.org/>
Apathy Club meeting this Friday.  If you want to come, you're not invited.

--
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 -