Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 13:50:55 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: Nathanael Nerode <neroden AT doctormoo DOT dyndns DOT org>
Cc: gcc AT gcc DOT gnu DOT org, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: cygwin not respecting --without-newlib?
Message-ID: <20020713175055.GA1695@redhat.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Nathanael Nerode <neroden AT doctormoo DOT dyndns DOT org>,
	gcc AT gcc DOT gnu DOT org, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20020709175531 DOT GA17920 AT doctormoo DOT dyndns DOT org> <200207091806 DOT g69I6Vu04666 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <20020709181544 DOT GA18076 AT doctormoo DOT dyndns DOT org> <20020713040909 DOT GA14590 AT redhat DOT com> <20020713173020 DOT GA4338 AT doctormoo DOT dyndns DOT org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20020713173020.GA4338@doctormoo.dyndns.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 01:30:20PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 12:09:09AM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 02:15:44PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote:
>> >On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 02:06:31PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> Cygwin *is* newlib.  When you build the cygwin DLL (cygwin1.dll) it
>> >> directly incorporates the newlib objects into it.  So, you must always
>> >> build newlib when you're building cygwin, and anything built for
>> >> cygwin is being built for newlib.
>> >
>> >OK; I'm not sure this helps me. :-)
>> >
>> >Suppose you're building a combined tree targeting Cygwin.  What should
>> >it mean to specify --without-newlib?  
>> >
>> >Should it mean "Don't build or use the newlib in the tree: use the
>> >preinstalled Cygwin libraries, or the ones I specified with --with-libs
>> >and --with-headers"?
>> >
>> >Should it simply be illegal, and result in an error message?
>> 
>> If there is a newlib in the tree, cygwin will attempt to use it.  Hence,
>> --without-newlib should be illegal for a cygwin target.
>> 
>> cgf
>What if you're not building winsup, but are building gcc (or gdb, or
>libstdc++-v3, etc.) for a cygwin target?  Is this even possible?

Yes.  I guess in that case, if there is no winsup directory but there is a
newlib directory, then --without-newlib could make sense.  That's probably
a pretty unusual situation, but you do have to account for it.

It might make sense to have a --without-winsup which implied --without-newlib.
--without-winsup would eliminate any *-target-winsup considerations.

So, I'd propose

1) Specified --without-winsup?
   If yes then turn off winsup and newlib

2) Specified --without-newlib?
   If yes, check for existence of winsup and, if it exists, issue
   error suggsting --without-winsup.
   Otherwise, remove *-target-newlib from consideration.

cgf



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/