X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <48370FA3.8060208@tlinx.org>
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 11:40:35 -0700
From: Linda Walsh <cygwin AT tlinx DOT org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (Windows/20080421)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: wstring support in GCC 4.1.2 in Cygwin 1.5.25-11
References: <17275355 DOT post AT talk DOT nabble DOT com> <17359564 DOT post AT talk DOT nabble DOT com> <4835C5F9 DOT 7010201 AT tlinx DOT org> <48362283 DOT 2010103 AT byu DOT net>
In-Reply-To: <48362283.2010103@byu.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
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

Eric Blake wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> According to Linda Walsh on 5/22/2008 1:14 PM:
> |     Linux doesn't support double-wide characters in its
> | system calls -- it's all in 'glibc'.
> |
> |     Cygwin doesn't need to support unicode anymore than
> | the linux kernel does.  It's whoever built the gcc/glib
> | packages that needs to supply that application-level (not
> | system-level) datatype.
> 
> Please get your terms straight.  glib is something MUCH different than
> glibc.  glib is ported to cygwin, glibc is not.  glib is a graphics
> library, glibc is an implementation of libc.  Cygwin uses newlib as its
> implementation of libc.  And that's why cygwin doesn't support wstring -
> because newlib does not have very complete wide character support.
---
	Where did 'newlib' come from?  I "thought", that newlib had
originally been designed as a 'bootstrapping' library in order to get
some minimal and widely used set of gnu-library functions up and running
so other gnu utils could also get "up & running".

	Wasn't it planned to bring in the full glibc at one point? --
and sorry for my terminology -- I'm often a lazy typist -- my typing
isn't what it used to be -- due to nerve impingements...I usually do
ok, but it depends on how much I've pushed, how tired or taxed I am...
I knew the correct name of glibc -- as put in quotes in the first
sentence...was latter on in 'backrefs', I got more lazy...sigh
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/