X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.0.20060428165427.059e7e88@surrey.ac.uk> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 17:07:21 +0100 To: "Williams, Gerald S \(Jerry\)" From: Lloyd Wood Subject: RE: Geomview & Cygwin setup Cc: In-Reply-To: <4C89134832705D4D85A6CD2EBF38AE0F3DFFCD@PAUMAILU03.ags.ager e.com> References: <4C89134832705D4D85A6CD2EBF38AE0F3DFFCD AT PAUMAILU03 DOT ags DOT agere DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com At Friday 2006-04-28 11:45 -0400, Williams, Gerald S \(Jerry\) wrote: >If you need to find out what gcc is targeting, perhaps you should >use "-dumpmachine" instead. > > $ gcc -dumpmachine > i686-pc-cygwin > $ gcc -dumpmachine -mno-cygwin > i686-pc-mingw32 Having identification behaviour dependent on a cygwin-specific flag like this is.. insane. Doing the former (which is what you'd expect) makes you none the wiser about mingw. The latter is a special case where you already have some idea what the target may be, so why would you issue the command? Begs the question. >Lloyd Wood wrote: > > cygming, not cygwin? ('ming' is a strong insult in the UK. I get > > the impression the writer doesn't like cygwin.) > >You think that's bad? When the company I was working for spun off >from AT&T, they decided to name themselves "loo scent". :-) Ah, the famous brown ring of quality, which, alas, won't exist for much longer. cheers, L. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/