X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
X-YMail-OSG: MgXkuXMVM1myiRzLBVjfynI3pi7fepeTnFXRO8u7eo5Ts2eCgkCHSkTpNQEjQ9Mz1rc.ML83_BFMBWtLip8QcmWE5xtDy5OXBuL.hbDzVZWtbwP8Ftf_q2aMCDiM7cVWoHvpgJXxRKLBxyo-
Message-ID: <46033384.5070908@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 18:55:16 -0700
From: Tim Prince <n8tm AT aol DOT com>
Reply-To: tprince AT computer DOT org
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Building GCC 4.3.0 on Cygwin...
References: <Pine DOT OSF DOT 4 DOT 21 DOT 0703221042210 DOT 6067-100000 AT ax0rm1 DOT roma1 DOT infn DOT it> <4602845D DOT 8020806 AT cwilson DOT fastmail DOT fm> <46029F82 DOT 1604112 AT dessent DOT net> <20070322154146 DOT GA28908 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>
In-Reply-To: <20070322154146.GA28908@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/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

cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com wrote:

> There is no conspiracy.  What is needed is for there to be a vocal
> advocate on the gcc list for Windows patches.  I can only approve a very
> limited amount of stuff so we need gcc global maintainers to approve the
> majority of Windows fixes.
I didn't call it a conspiracy, but I myself have been the recipient of 
comments from Microsoft personnel like "we don't want you using cygwin, 
we won't fix Windows bugs which are reported mainly by cygwin users."  I 
don't claim to see uniformity in positions taken by people representing 
Microsoft.
The people you mention are not the only ones who have discontinued 
visible activity after taking a prominent role in cygwin.
Not that I have the competence to solve any such problems, but if you 
check gcc-testsuite you should see that I have posted the greatest 
number of cygwin results the last 10 years, since well before my present 
employment.  The average time for action on the few gcc PR's and patches 
I have proposed exceeds a year, so I don't claim an effective record. 
If evidence is presented that my doing so has hindered the success of 
cygwin, or constitutes a conflict of interest, I will not attempt to 
resume testing.
I won't comment on the magnitude of efforts (sometimes successful) by 
non-open software vendors to get even treatment from Microsoft; so I 
mention my obligation to disclaim any relationship between what I say 
here and my employer's activities.

--
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/