delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: cygwin/2019/05/22/02:06:00

X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=h19loGZysZMfpROX
ZXsS4oRi86SVVI8C1e1XMTbPEesSsh7J+YDKpo7JcVxbx444NI82bDTLjovrMUrZ
5SavppoS3EcBkVGXWYjg/mZXANBVf9NPdfWqvg7tgYaR2K3XhukDkd6xhNwD6mvV
jiZ5UBV8SWQww5AaCIf6J4CQhMk=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=mzLwtHg5RPSZcEOB0MLff8
sqd+E=; b=gZRHwHk90QqJbH3dkpugoNd21FZfUiI+R1zdqw/qhpNbg6iuWk42o4
NfLBRavJ8Fvhv+T06LHw70Moe0EMaLsWTV08GW/PS1Sd9YoVi4Wdy4GuH75lI6Xb
wWgsWe8H5/UElQYeyoSkMNC9EieKJykN6t5GXpfYOlG7KOiojeVAg=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.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
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=3rd, tight, satisfactory, 002
X-HELO: smtp.webfaction.com
Subject: Re: Is our use of Cygwin to build & run OpenOCD a good one?
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <ad7a93aa-d688-d177-bdf2-d368f2acbbd0 AT mindchasers DOT com> <CACoZoo1Q=DyY0i-SFHjGmU8BeJgGCkTEfkYXJ32QGF63BxSoZQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <DB7PR01MB5386F37F1AA9DE324DF60E8EDE060 AT DB7PR01MB5386 DOT eurprd01 DOT prod DOT exchangelabs DOT com> <57b68911-8425-dd1a-95ee-ddb55b935f39 AT mindchasers DOT com> <1d4f0e40-737c-0a69-c995-e7b635b7bec6 AT gmail DOT com>
From: Bob Cochran <cygwin AT mindchasers DOT com>
Message-ID: <09ea056b-a9cf-5564-c2ed-4ad63be287a7@mindchasers.com>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 02:05:43 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1d4f0e40-737c-0a69-c995-e7b635b7bec6@gmail.com>
X-IsSubscribed: yes

On 5/21/19 1:55 PM, LRN wrote:
> On 20.05.2019 21:49, Bob Cochran wrote:
>> On 5/20/19 10:27 AM, Jose Isaias Cabrera wrote:
>>> Erik Soderquist, on Monday, May 20, 2019 10:16 AM, wrote...
>>>> On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 3:44 PM Bob Cochran wrote:
>>>> <snip>
>>>>> "Cygwin? this is probably still functional, but now can be considered a
>>>>> (pre)historic solution."
>>>> The words of the ignorant, in my opinion.  Cygwin has done an
>>>> excellent job of maintaining currency and usefulness.
>>> Indeed.  I have been using cygwin since 1996-7.  Can't remember the exact year, but it has been God-sent, and it has been in every Windows machine I have had control.  Just my 0.02. Thanks.
>>
>> Thank you to everyone who has replied to my question whether this was a
>> good use case for Cygwin!  It was great to read all of the replies and
>> see that I'm in sync with this project & its users / developers.
>>
> I've read the actual thread on OpenOCD ML, and i've looked at the links posted
> there. I probably should have subscribed to OpenOCD ML, but i'm too lazy to do
> so and will write here instead.


Thank you LRN for the excellent write up(s).   I'm going to summarize 
this and add it to our web article as alternatives to our approach.

Please also consider that Cygwin worked without a hassle and is on all 
of our PCs.   Time is tight and maybe I can be build a native Windows 
OpenOCD exe that works with our hardware, but maybe I can't without 
burning a lot of time.
At this point, we're good to go with Cygwin.  Also, I want students that 
we're working with to install Cygwin on their PCs.   I never bothered to 
learn complicated Power shell syntax & commands because I never needed 
to - just opened a Cygwin terminal instead.

And I'm reluctant to install other translation projects on my PC like 
MSYS2 and MinGW because of bloat, support, and security concerns.   Try 
to keep it as simple as possible!

But anyway, the main point of my email is to thank you for taking the 
time to write this up.

Bob


>
> Basically, the thread had three participants:
>
> *kristof mulier: wanted to get OpenOCD binaries for Windows, tried MSYS2, but
> didn't get satisfactory results; posted a link to a guide for building OpenOCD
> with MSYS2, written by some 3rd party
> *you: posted a link to a guild for building OpenOCD with Cygwin
> *Liviu Ionescu: pointed out that you should be using mingw-w64, said that
> Cygwin is prehistoric
>
> Liviu Ionescu seems to be a Microsoft fanboy, since he advocated for the use of
> WSL (i already said earlier what i think of WSL). However, he wasn't wrong when
> he said that you should use MinGW. If a piece of software can be built with
> MinGW, then you generally should do so, unless there are specific reasons to
> avoid that (compatibility, subtle porting bugs, etc). It seems to be the case
> for OpenOCD.
>
> kristof mulier seems to have weak developer-fu, and got a bit confused. The
> MSYS2 guide that he used pointed to a MSYS2 package git repo, and kristof
> assumed that the repo in question contained OpenOCD source code (which is
> supposedly why he was getting an old version of OpenOCD compiled all the time).
> That is not the case[0]. MSYS2 package repo contains small buildscripts for the
> appropriate packages. The reason he was getting an old version is that the
> version (git revision, in case of OpenOCD-git) is hardcoded into PKGBUILD file
> (which he didn't edit, uncritically following the guide; the author of the
> guide didn't concern himself with getting OpenOCD from lastest git master HEAD,
> and thus didn't mention that detail).
>
> Therefore i still sand on my advice: either cross-compile from Cygwin, or try
> MSYS2 (the irony here is that your Cygwin guide describes *almost exactly* how
> one can build OpenOCD from MSYS2).
>
> [0]: at least, i assume so; i don't really use MSYS2 repos or its package
> manager, therefore i could be mistaken
>


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019