From: banders AT ECD DOT Rockwell DOT COM (Bartlee A. Anderson) Subject: Re: Mingw32 Futures (Classification) 6 Mar 1998 02:32:09 -0800 Message-ID: <34F5BD27.26B4.cygnus.gnu-win32@switch.rockwell.com> References: <199802210941 DOT BAA04960 AT smtp3 DOT teleport DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: pgarceau AT teleport DOT com Cc: gnu-win32 AT cygnus DOT com What do we call egcs then? It uses gcc as well. I think we need an extra field. Or can we differentiate implicitly by the version numbers? Enquiring minds want to know ;) Bart Paul Garceau wrote: > > Greetings, > > On 23 Feb 98 at 23:34, the Illustrious Jan-Jaap van der Heijden wrote: > > > On Sat, 21 Feb 1998, Paul Garceau wrote: > > > > > >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. > > > > Personally, I have always used terms such as "mingw32 gcc", "mingw32 GNU > > software" etc., just to avoid this kind of confusion. > > (skip OpenGL references) > > > Seriously: work has to be done before mingw32-gcc can fully utilize the > > possibilities of the Platform SDK. This includes modification to > > binutils, and an easy, upgradable way to patch the SDK headers. > > > > > I am not sure where Mumit Khans' version fits in here, though I > > > understand that EGCS is supposedly considered the ragged edge of cygwin32. > > > > Not quite. > > EGCS is a vehicle to speed up the development of new features for GCC. > > Mumit Khan and I swap patches every now and then, so as far as mingw32 > > related features are concerned, the compilers are more or less equal. > > Thanks for the clarification, Jan-Jaap. > > The Illustrious Colin Peters wrote: > > > > > 1. Mingw32 is basically a C run time library replacement. As I understand > > > > it gcc is usually bundled with the GNU C library (libc and libm) among > > > > other libraries. Cygwin32's newlib is similar (with a more ambitious > > > > goal). Has anyone seriously thought about how this should fit together? > > > > If *I* thought about it who would I need to talk to about implementing it > > > > (newsgroups? mailing lists?)? > > Paul G. wrote: > > > > The most recent information indicates that gcc/++ 2.8.1 will have the > > > mingw32 headers, etc. (basic Mingw32 distribution) completely integrated > > > as well as full compatibility with the Cygwin32.dll by simply including > > > the cygwin32.dll in the distribution. > > Jan-Jaap wrote: > > > Nope. > > GCC (sources) do not include any C library component, nor libstdc++ > > However, all essential support for i386-mingw32 or i386-cygwin32 targets > > is in the regular sources, so no patches are required to build the > > compiler. A few patches exist, but they are bugfixes. > > > > > Mingw32 would not exist if Cygwin32 did not have some sort of previous > > > existence prior to the Mingw32 (v0.4) date of availability. > > > > > > > If it was not for the PE-COFF support implemented by the Cygnus' people, > > mingw32-gcc would not exist. And Colin Peters started with a hacked > > cygwin32 toolchain, if I remember correctly. > > > > > Apparently EGCS requires the "basic" Mingw32 distribution as authored by > > > Colin Peters. The "extended" Mingw32 distribution, as authored by > > > Jan-Jaap, requires the "basic" Mingw32 distribution in order to function > > > properly as far as I can tell. > > > > > > > ???? > > Sorry for the confusion, I was attempting to categorize things since > that's what I thought Colin was asking for. My mistake. > > > > > I did not extend mingw32. I have no plans to touch the essentials of > > mingw32. I fail to see why "my" GCC should be "extended" and Mumit's > > "basic". > > I don't believe that Mumit's is the "basic". If there is a "basic" it > would be Colins' Mingw32-headers. > > I classify Mingw32-gcc-2.8.0 as an "extension" of Colins' > Mingw32-headers by nature of the fact that Mingw32-gcc-2.8.0 would not be > functioning as it is without Colins' headers. Thus, my definitions of > Mingw32 are functionally oriented as opposed to process oriented. > > Mingw32-gcc-2.8.x software requires Colins' Mingw32-headers. > Mingw32-gcc-2.8.x then takes those headers and integrates them with > gcc-2.8.x or visa-versa. > > Therefore, and imho, Mingw32-gcc-2.8.x is equivalent to adding gcc-2.8.x > to the Mingw32-headers and redistributing both as a unique package, > distribution or toolchain. > > The above process tends to clearly define exactly what Mingw32-gcc-2.8.0 > functionality actually is and may serve as a means to allow us to classify > Mingw32-gcc-2.8.0 in a much clearer and more concise manner. > > Peace, > > Paul G. > > Nothing real can be threatened. > Nothing unreal exists. > - > 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". -- Bartlee A. Anderson System Test (Interfaces-Tools-Automation-ISDN) Rockwell International Electronic Commerce Division 300 Bauman Ct. banders AT ecd DOT rockwell DOT com MS 933-605 Opinions my own, not Rockwell's VOICE (630) 227-8975 Wood Dale, IL 60191 FAX (630) 227-9771 - 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".