Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender:	cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID:	<00e501c0af37$39461450$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From:	"Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To:	<cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
References:	<20010317172830 DOT A24346 AT redhat DOT com> <3AB3ECE7 DOT 26B3D8D3 AT ece DOT gatech DOT edu> <20010317180703 DOT A23000 AT redhat DOT com>
Subject:	Re: gcc 2.95.3-1 and -mwin32
Date:	Sun, 18 Mar 2001 10:08:46 +1100
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-OriginalArrivalTime:	17 Mar 2001 23:03:02.0690 (UTC) FILETIME=[6B22A020:01C0AF36]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Faylor" <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: <cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2001 10:07 AM
Subject: Re: gcc 2.95.3-1 and -mwin32


> On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 06:01:59PM -0500, Charles S. Wilson wrote:
> >Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >>
> >> I've got gcc 2.95.3-1 ready to go.  It seems to work ok.
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >> So, unless someone has a strong objection, the default for gcc
2.95.3-1,
> >> gcc 3.0, and gcc 3.1 will be to include /usr/include/w32api.
> >
> >Q: Does that also mean that the default for gcc-2.95.3-1 on cygwin
will
> >be to #define WIN32 & WINDOWS in addition to merely including
> >/usr/include/w32api in the include path?  e.g. that -mwin32 is the
> >default now (again)?
>
> I wasn't planning on doing this, no.  I still think that Cygwin should
not
> define these unless asked.
>
> This does cause problems for some of the stuff in sources.redhat.com
but
> they are minor compared to the effort of adding -mwin32 everywhere
that
> it was needed.
>
> So, this is still different from gcc-2.95.2-1.
>
> cgf
>

Will -mwin32 still be present? I think it should if you do not define
WIN32.

Rob

- Raw text -