Mail Archives: cygwin/2006/07/27/21:06:35
William Sheehan wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> There is no advantage using cygwin if you want to use a Makefile
>> which contains MS-DOS paths. Using MinGW
>> makes perfect sense in that case.
>
> I strongly disagree with this statement. A primary benefit of using Cygwin
> is that so many Linux-like tools are available from one central installer.
> If you have a Makefile system that uses Cygwin for more than just the make
> binary and binutils (aka more than what MinGW provides), it becomes
> irritating to developers that they need to install at least two software
> products (Cygwin and MinGW in this case) and create special path voodoo just
> for one product.
I disagree with both of you.
I use Cygwin tools, including Gnu make, to build an ocean model. This
system supports both Cygwin (g95-cygwin) and non-Cygwin (Compaq,
g95-mingw) Fortran compilers. (These days I use g95-cygwin mostly, but
there are good reasons to support the others.)
I don't use Mingw make because the build system was developed on Unix
and I just don't want the grief of porting it to a naked Windows system.
BUT I wasn't bitten by the removal of Windows mode in make, because I
always run make in Unix mode. Make doesn't generally see the Windows
paths. When I need to pass Windows path to the non-Cygwin compilers, I
create them on the fly with cygpath. This does require a little care
with quoting, but I've managed to sort out all the problems I've
encountered.
I won't go into more detail, but I have posted examples of this in the
past on this list.
--
Mark Hadfield "Kei puwaha te tai nei, Hoea tahi tatou"
m DOT hadfield AT niwa DOT co DOT nz
National Institute for Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA)
--
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 -