X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Date:	Sat, 18 Mar 2006 02:10:58 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: GCC 4.x+
Message-ID:	<20060318071058.GA27498@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<Pine DOT OSF DOT 4 DOT 21 DOT 0603160045360 DOT 28991-100000 AT ax0rm1 DOT roma1 DOT infn DOT it> <4418AB38 DOT B7D87B36 AT dessent DOT net> <441B8AB3 DOT 9080308 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm> <441BAEF9 DOT 8090404 AT myrealbox DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<441BAEF9.8090404@myrealbox.com>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.11
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
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

On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 10:55:53PM -0800, Tim Prince wrote:
>I've heard of some reluctance among gcc developers to continue support 
>for cygwin.  There seems to be a lack of interest in problem solving, or 
>in overcoming the binutils bottleneck in the way of a 64-bit native 
>cygwin.

Huh?  Could you point me at a developer who is expressing reluctance?  I
know most of them and hang out on the gcc irc channel and no one has
said anything to me.

cgf

--
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 -