DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:to:references:from:subject:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type; q=dns; s=default; b=AHFt
	XLmi5uOBqe5EmCABh08TOg6kZP5SjeGaC3E4eAH0q+GF4tJHZwRXw2lXG7zNpNJQ
	zLAoeTKArLd1DKxEs7SPPLXb4zYEGwe07fMO3faPyTMOXSF5ObRFoPwtCw7fT4Il
	0zd3T4B1UE0e1vGpYyjS2KV5tliL5RvD4cxCIfo=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <ad7a93aa-d688-d177-bdf2-d368f2acbbd0 AT mindchasers DOT com>
From: LRN <lrn1986 AT gmail DOT com>
Subject: Re: Is our use of Cygwin to build & run OpenOCD a good one?
Message-ID: <709ae9ed-3eb9-f78b-10f0-fd05585f0c7d@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 19 May 2019 23:53:45 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <ad7a93aa-d688-d177-bdf2-d368f2acbbd0@mindchasers.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="mODVM28tAkyQUlOkiS4zJINmrTkwc6XgQ"

--mODVM28tAkyQUlOkiS4zJINmrTkwc6XgQ
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="vXHv0I1GwmvRU3eAA2fdoEIllVVKhheRG";
 protected-headers="v1"
From: LRN <lrn1986 AT gmail DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <709ae9ed-3eb9-f78b-10f0-fd05585f0c7d AT gmail DOT com>
Subject: Re: Is our use of Cygwin to build & run OpenOCD a good one?


--vXHv0I1GwmvRU3eAA2fdoEIllVVKhheRG
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 19.05.2019 22:43, Bob Cochran wrote:
> And, I received the=20
> following feedback:
>=20
> "Cygwin? this is probably still functional, but now can be considered a=
=20
> (pre)historic solution."
>=20
> I personally have been using Cygwin for many years and have come to=20
> trust it for interfacing to Linux and macOS boxes from Windows.=C2=A0 I t=
hink=20
> it's a great project, so when I wanted to build & run OpenOCD from=20
> scratch, I naturally went to Cygwin.
>=20
> I would appreciate any feedback on our use of Cygwin for building &=20
> running OpenOCD: https://mindchasers.com/dev/openocd-darsena-windows
>=20

Cygwin allows you to compile programs written for *nix (specifically - for
Linux) with [almost] no changes to the source code, producing Windows
executables that run on Windows. That is achieved by using a compatibility
runtime (the Cygwin DLL).

This is useful if:
1) The code you're compiling is not Windows-compatible (i.e. can't be compi=
led
with MinGW against MinGW SDK).
2) You're OK with a dependence on Cygwin runtime
3) You're OK with a possible performance hit that the runtime incurs. The
amount of the performance you lose varies; might be negligible; might be
significant - depends on what the code does.

I grepped OpenOCD code, and it seems to me that it is Windows-compatible
(README.Windows even says so explicitly). In that case you should probably
cross-compile it to Windows (see autotools documentation on cross-compilati=
on).
You *can* cross-compile from Cygwin, but cross-compiling from *nix will be
wa-a-ay faster.

You can also use MSYS2 to compile it on Windows (without doing
cross-compilation). Most likely the process won't be any faster than
cross-compiling from Cygwin.

Since OpenOCD uses autotools, these are your only options (if it were using
CMake or Meson, you might have been able to build at least the binaries with
just MinGW-w64 SDK and the buildsystem; but for autotools you need a
fully-functional POSIX shell, meaning Cygwin, MSYS2 or the real *nix shell
running on *nix).

There's also the modern, "hip" way of using Windows POSIX subsystem (these =
days
it's called "WSL", i think?) to run the necessary tools, but don't see any
significant practical advantages to doing that (you still can't get zero-co=
st
fork this way), whereas ethical ramifications might be significant.


--vXHv0I1GwmvRU3eAA2fdoEIllVVKhheRG--

--mODVM28tAkyQUlOkiS4zJINmrTkwc6XgQ
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=I9C/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--mODVM28tAkyQUlOkiS4zJINmrTkwc6XgQ--