Subject: RE: CygUtils Version of zip (and Symlinks)
From: "Parker, Ron" <[email-masked]>
To: Cosmin Truta <[email-masked]>, Charles Wilson <[email-masked]>
Cc: Jason Tishler <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 10:56:53 -0500

> > When you get right down to it, cygwin is NOT windows. It 
> does everything
> > it can to make windows look like Unix, so that apps can run 
> *as if they
> > were on unix* with little or no changes. So, by that logic,
> > cygwin-zip/unzip =should= be built as unix-ish apps, not windows-ish
> > ones.
> 
> Maybe you are right.
> I personally look at gcc as a free alternative for a good 
> Win32 compiler,
> but I agree that cygwin is a "Unix on Win" and maybe most of 
> the people
> look at it that way.

ISTM that the right behavior would be for cygwin to build a UNIX-ish (un)zip
and for mingw to build a Windows style program.  As already pointed out
cygwin should be thought of as "Unix on Win" and IMO mingw should be thought
of as "as a free alternative for a good Win32 compiler". 

I realize that cygwin and mingw are both supported by the same compiler, but
supplying -mno-cygwin causes gcc to switch from cygwin to mingw behavior and
__MINGW32__ becomes defined.

This may be more a question for cygwin-developers, but I hate crossposts and
know most readers of that list at least review this one.  So, wouldn't it be
appropriate when compiling without -mno-cygwin for the specs file to define
"unix", "UNIX" and similar "standard" defines?  They seem to be checked for
in newlib, zlib, X11, and many other sources?

Yes I know I can make this change in my local sources, but I prefer to work
with standard sources and now seemed a good time to bring it up.  I have
been wondering about it for some time.

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to [email-masked]