Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sources.redhat.com Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 23:46:51 -0500 From: Christopher Faylor To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: -mno-cygwin and C++ -- solved! Message-ID: <20010329234651.A10894@redhat.com> Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com References: <20010328223246.A4677@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i In-Reply-To: ; from khan@NanoTech.Wisc.EDU on Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 10:03:14PM -0600 On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 10:03:14PM -0600, Mumit Khan wrote: >On Wed, 28 Mar 2001, Christopher Faylor wrote: > >> Sometimes I think that the best way to handle all of this is to have a >> completely different compiler which defaults to a totally separate >> /usr/include and /usr/lib area. i686-pc-mingw-gcc. Hmm. It has a nice >> ring to it. > >Hmmm ... could it be because it makes perfect sense ;-? Seriously, this >is what I used to recommend to anyone who'd ask for a "build environment" >for Mingw. Glad to see I'm not the only one ... Wasn't --mno-cygwin a Geoff Noer invention? Would I cause a massive volcanic eruption if I ripped --mno-cygwin out of gcc and just suggested that people ran the mingw version of gcc? I guess we'd then be subjected to pathname complaints... cgf -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple