From: pgarceau AT teleport DOT com (Paul Garceau) Subject: Re: Mingw32 Futures 26 Feb 1998 09:07:03 -0800 Message-ID: <199802251104.DAA13785.cygnus.gnu-win32@mail1.teleport.com> References: <00b401bd3d04$b4b0efa0$fa173185 AT gbird0 DOT fu DOT is DOT saga-u DOT ac DOT jp> Reply-To: pgarceau AT teleport DOT com To: gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com On 19 Feb 98 at 16:05, the Illustrious Colin Peters wrote: > Hello all, > > I hope those of you who do not use or have any interest in Mingw32 don't > mind me taking up a bit of bandwidth with strictly Mingw32 issues on this > list. On the other hand I hope that people in positions of > power/authority and/or interested users might take a moment to give their > opinions. > > First of all, I'd like to make a little terminology clear. When I talk > about Mingw32 I mean the header files, configuration files, startup code > and support libraries that allow gcc to build applications which use > CRTDLL.DLL (or possibly other MS supplied C run time library DLLs) as > their C run time library. Many posters refer to "Mingw32 2.8.0" which is > actually the GNU compiler gcc version 2.8.0 built by Jan-Jaap using the > Mingw32 headers and distributed bundled with those headers. I'd call that > Mingw32 gcc 2.8.0. > > That is typical of the "problems" I am having right now. Basically, there > are at least three versions of the gcc compiler distribution which either > have or plan to have Mingw32 integrated into them. Jan jaap's Mingw32 gcc > 2.8.0, Mumit Khan's releases of EGCS for Mingw32, Cygwin32 gcc (perhaps > starting with b20) and maybe the FSF version of gcc. > > I have no problem with this at all. I put that code in the public domain > so people could use it. However, I am basically the defacto maintainer of > the Mingw32 source base until someone tells me otherwise, and so my > questions are something like this: (skip) > 2. Is it or is it not the gcc maintainer's intention to do integration of > Mingw32 into the gcc distribution? Jan-Jaap? >I have heard that gcc itself has been > modified to compile *under* Mingw32 anyway. I suspect they will not go > further (in fact, I would *encourage* them to not go further). (skip) > Big shrink-wrapped packages are nice for some > people, but I like at least having the option of customization. Is this > something that could be done? Is this something that I could help do? > 3. If I am to continue as the de-facto maintainer of Mingw32 I should > like to have an idea of how updates should be made for the greatest > convenience for all involved. I would also like to see this. > The future of Mingw32 seems to be leaning > towards a package that people who build gcc for Win32 may be adding on to > their compiler distributions, not a package that general users will be > adding on to their compiler after installation. I personally am using Mingw32-gcc-2.8.0 for ports of existing Win32 apps (games and rendering engines) for the NT 4.0 system platforms without using VC/C++ or Visual Basic. It is my way of boycotting MS. > As such, do any of these > compiler distributers (Mumit? Jan-Jaap?) have comments on such nicities > as directory structures, readme files (i.e. what instructions do I need > to write) and such. Are you asking, Colin, how to restructure the Mingw32 header distribution to better facilitate people like Mumit and Jan-Jaap? > Similarly, are all you guys willing to send me back > changes you make for (hopefully) re-integration? Do you think it would be > possible for me to have one copy of Mingw32 that will satisfy everyone? I would like to see that sort of thing as well, considering I am moving Mingw32-gcc-2.8.0 to the North American ftp site. It would make things much easier for everyone involved if there were some sort of version standard for Mingw32-gcc-2.8.0. Peace, Paul G. Chronicles of Aurum: Book I A Journey Into the Fantastic http://www.mindspring.com/~subsoft ICQ#977283 - For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "gnu-win32-request AT cygnus DOT com" with one line of text: "help".