Mail Archives: cygwin/2009/01/28/00:29:26
Greg Chicares wrote:
> On 2009-01-28 02:21Z, Charles Wilson wrote:
>> Pursuant to a discussion on the libtool list, I'm trying to get a feel
>> for how many cygwin users rely on the cygwin environment to drive the
>> *native* MinGW gcc compiler.
>
> I use the native MinGW compiler in a Cygwin environment,
> successfully, many hours every day.
A few additional questions, then:
Do you use gnu-style configured projects (autoconf, automake, libtool,
all that?) -- or some other build framework?
Do you use cygwin's make (which version?), mingw32-make, or perhaps a
cygwin build of msys's csmake/cpmake?
Do you use gcc's -M* options for generating dependencies -- with
mingw-gcc, these rules will be in dos format and cygwin-make-3.81
doesn't grok them?
What about creating static libraries? If you use mingw's ar.exe, do you
use explicit `cygpath` rules to convert unix paths to the DOS paths that
version of ar can understand, or some other technique?
For a hint about why I started this thread, and why I am asking these
questions, see
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool-patches/2009-01/msg00163.html
-- especially my failures with
$ export PATH="/c/MinGW/bin:$PATH"
$ ../libtool/configure --build=i686-pc-cygwin --host=mingw32
This led to a suggestion that "--build=cygwin --host=mingw32" should
always be interpreted as: mingw32-gcc is a cygwin-hosted cross compiler,
NOT the native MinGW-project supported gcc (and if it IS the native
MinGW one, expect breakage). I'm not sure such a sweeping statement is
accurate, or wise -- will that assumption break people's exising
(working) setups?
--
Chuck
--
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 -