X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Message-ID: <49C79B0B.9010200@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 14:22:03 +0000
From: Greg Chicares <gchicares AT sbcglobal DOT net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: PING: Deprecation of -mno-cygwin.
References: <49C6DADF DOT 90305 AT gmail DOT com> <20090323093234 DOT GK9322 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <49C78FA2 DOT 4010209 AT users DOT sourceforge DOT net> <alpine DOT LRH DOT 0 DOT 9999 DOT 0903230939480 DOT 20344 AT honker DOT vgersoft DOT com> <49C794CB DOT 3010305 AT gmail DOT com> <alpine DOT LRH DOT 0 DOT 9999 DOT 0903230956520 DOT 21860 AT honker DOT vgersoft DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.0.9999.0903230956520.21860@honker.vgersoft.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
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

On 2009-03-23 14:00Z, Steve Thompson wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Dave Korn wrote:
> 
>>  It's a bit of a kludge compared to having a real honest-to-god
>> cross-compiler.  It's never worked entirely right in terms of keeping cygwin
>> and mingw headers and libs completely separate.  A full-blown mingw
>> cross-compiler won't cost that much in terms of disk space and the reliability
>> and correctness improvements will be worth it.
> 
> That's very interesting. I've been using -mno-cygwin for several years, 
> having done many many thousands of compiles and links using it, and I have 
> never had a problem with either headers or libraries! Is there a 
> recommended alternative?

The recommended alternative is the forthcoming mingw cross-compiler.

I think Yaakov's right to recommend a clean break with the past:

| >   $ i686-pc-cygwin-gcc -mno-cygwin	<- Spits out a warning
|
| Please, NO!  -mno-cygwin needs to go away already.

which would put all the confusion to rest. If the i386-pc-mingw32
true cross-compiler is gcc-4.x, then much code will have to be
changed anyway because of stricter diagnostics; it's actually
kinder IMO to force makefiles to change at the same time, by
treating -m[no-]cygwin as an error.

--
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/