Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sourceware.cygnus.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com From: Chris Faylor Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2000 20:55:38 -0400 To: Cygnus Subject: Re: naive question: gcc and glibc Message-ID: <20000618205538.B10258@cygnus.com> Reply-To: cygwin@sourceware.cygnus.com Mail-Followup-To: Cygnus References: <394C96EC.6EC7F26A@Wanadoo.fr> <001d01bfd927$1ca5e7d0$0100000a@TIMYX18EWDT6RQ> <394D3697.9FEAE83B@Wanadoo.fr> <002e01bfd971$aae3a240$0100000a@TIMYX18EWDT6RQ> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <002e01bfd971$aae3a240$0100000a@TIMYX18EWDT6RQ>; from tprince@computer.org on Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 03:07:58PM -0700 On Sun, Jun 18, 2000 at 03:07:58PM -0700, Tim Prince wrote: >I suppose it would be a large project to port glibc to cygwin. Probably >not even advisable to do the whole thing, as long as cygnus/redhat are >maintaining newlib partly for this application. I'd be happy to tackle >certain parts in which I have an interest, if suitably motivated. The >ieeefp thing looks feasible. There, I suppose we want to have the >functions both under the names they have in glibc and the ones currently >in the cygwin headers. As we would likely end up with an add-on library >which simply fits glibc components into cygwin, it's unlikely to be >adopted as part of cygwin or newlib. Mumit Khan has already ported glibc to Windows, sans cygwin. >The subject of math functions and bringing x87 support into cygwin has >been brought up before. It has the same problem, apparently, of not >being acceptable to newlib and therefore not wanted as a standard part >of cygwin. I hope I'm not mis-characterizing what was said, and >actually I'd be happy to be wrong. I don't know if you're wrong or not but I don't recall any discussion like this and I can't imagine why anyone would turn away properly written extra functionality in newlib. However, I keep pointing out that the place for newlib discussions is newlib@sourceware.cygnus.com. Rather than speculate on what will or won't be accepted, why not ask the actual maintainers? cgf -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com