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
X-Authentication-Warning: eos.vss.fsi.com: ford owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 16:53:29 -0600 (CST)
From: Brian Ford <ford AT vss DOT fsi DOT com>
X-X-Sender: ford AT eos
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Cygwin gcc vs official gcc?
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0302121653110.21272-100000@eos>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

What is the state of/reason for Cygwin/Mingw specific mods to official
gcc sources?  I assume these mods will eventually make it in to the
official tree, right?  What is the typical migration path?

I ask, because I am trying to do DWARF2 development work for Cygwin.

I thought that I should start with current gcc (3.2.2) and binutils
(2.13.2.1) sources (or CVS).  But, I just ran into a double alignment ABI
breakage with the official gcc sources.  I have applied the proper patch
locally to fix it, but I wonder why it has not been officially submitted
yet?  I also wonder how many other gotcha's there are?

What should a Cygwin developer use as a base for binutils and gcc
development work?

Thanks.

-- 
Brian Ford
Senior Realtime Software Engineer
VITAL - Visual Simulation Systems
FlightSafety International
Phone: 314-551-8460
Fax:   314-551-8444


--
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/