X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 02:16:48 -0800 From: Christopher Layne To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Eliminating -mno-cygwin from gcc? Message-ID: <20070201101648.GD25688@ns1.anodized.com> References: <20070131131337 DOT GA17256 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070131131337.GA17256@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 X-Assp-Spam-Prob: 0.00000 X-Assp-Whitelisted: Yes X-Assp-Envelope-From: clayne AT ns1 DOT anodized DOT com X-Assp-Intended-For: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: 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 On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 08:13:37AM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: > When I was maintaining cygwin's gcc, I often thought about eliminating > -mno-cygwin and just providing a pure mingw cross compiler in the > distribution. I really don't know why it wasn't done that way to begin > with. I have vague recollections of arguing for this when -mno-cygwin > was first introduced by Geoff Noer but apparently I wasn't very > persuasive. > > I know that this will probably be another "Death of Cygwin predicted" Fine by me. Can we slip in removing text mounts at the same time? ;) -cl -- 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/