Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:49:25 -0500
From: Chris Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: Prof Brian Ripley <ripley AT stats DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk>
Cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: specs file for gcc-2.95.2-7 and -mno-cygwin
Message-ID: <20010206114925.D7368@redhat.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Prof Brian Ripley <ripley AT stats DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk>,
	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <Pine DOT GSO DOT 4 DOT 31 DOT 0102061241270 DOT 453-100000 AT toucan DOT stats>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.31.0102061241270.453-100000@toucan.stats>; from ripley@stats.ox.ac.uk on Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 12:44:01PM +0000

On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 12:44:01PM +0000, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
>Sorry, but if you don't copy the author, I don't get to see this for a
>while!  There's far too much traffic on that list for me to subscribe to
>it, so I just read archives.
>
>
>> Nope.  The isystem was just to get the include order correct.  It is
>> a recent addition.
>
>Then the `local' is a mistake!  I am sure it was never tested.

Why is it a mistake? I added the functionality of searching the
/usr/local/include/mingw directory and tried to preserve the
ordering that gcc requires.

The fact that the mingw directory needs to be included before the
gcc include directory is problematic.  It's counter to the way
that gcc is supposed to operate.  I'll have to think about what
to do there, or, better yet, Mumit or Earnie will tell me precisely
what they want done.

Anyway, I made the gcc available specifically for testing.  This is a
work in progress.

>> Could you possibly break out this diff into separate lines so that I can
>> see what's changed?
>
>No, it is a single line in the specs file.  It doesn't work broken into
>lines. Can you not apply this as patch and diff the two in emacs?

I'm aware that it is not a single line in the specs file however, if you
broke up the old and new specs file into distinct lines, a diff would
show specifically what changed.  I don't have a problem physically viewing
long lines.

>Oh, and although the comment suggests -mno-cygwin and -mno-win32 are
>incompatible, that's actually what you get with -mno-cygwin by default.
>To get the Win32 header files you need -mno-cygwin -mwin32.

That's a bug.

cgf

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Check out: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple