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=or14
	BG6SevLcCzZ1G8U9u5R9snO4G4WpUKMe91hA42l6yVqzmyJDek9iENIIxsAQ2w24
	7QRfWMXavLTrWT2+LeMOnkSnb/ohmCAjRlgOoX+20480G9LLHOg2LA8Bij6+6ZAk
	/atggoh8/+dnfn/lzTLJ9+e3S1sMeVnpEFCw5MI=
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> <CACoZoo1Q=DyY0i-SFHjGmU8BeJgGCkTEfkYXJ32QGF63BxSoZQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <DB7PR01MB5386F37F1AA9DE324DF60E8EDE060 AT DB7PR01MB5386 DOT eurprd01 DOT prod DOT exchangelabs DOT com> <57b68911-8425-dd1a-95ee-ddb55b935f39 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: <1d4f0e40-737c-0a69-c995-e7b635b7bec6@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 20:55:23 +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: <57b68911-8425-dd1a-95ee-ddb55b935f39@mindchasers.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5BUtGFshMagBFeUhyLlcOXApR4eE3F7Ss"

--5BUtGFshMagBFeUhyLlcOXApR4eE3F7Ss
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="lYTy33frzfosJLtpHmdBqurEvKnt3L0Cl";
 protected-headers="v1"
From: LRN <lrn1986 AT gmail DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <1d4f0e40-737c-0a69-c995-e7b635b7bec6 AT gmail DOT com>
Subject: Re: Is our use of Cygwin to build & run OpenOCD a good one?


--lYTy33frzfosJLtpHmdBqurEvKnt3L0Cl
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 20.05.2019 21:49, Bob Cochran wrote:
> On 5/20/19 10:27 AM, Jose Isaias Cabrera wrote:
>> Erik Soderquist, on Monday, May 20, 2019 10:16 AM, wrote...
>>> On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 3:44 PM Bob Cochran wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>> "Cygwin? this is probably still functional, but now can be considered a
>>>> (pre)historic solution."
>>> The words of the ignorant, in my opinion.  Cygwin has done an
>>> excellent job of maintaining currency and usefulness.
>> Indeed.  I have been using cygwin since 1996-7.  Can't remember the exac=
t year, but it has been God-sent, and it has been in every Windows machine =
I have had control.  Just my 0.02. Thanks.
>=20
>=20
> Thank you to everyone who has replied to my question whether this was a=
=20
> good use case for Cygwin!=C2=A0 It was great to read all of the replies a=
nd=20
> see that I'm in sync with this project & its users / developers.
>=20

I've read the actual thread on OpenOCD ML, and i've looked at the links pos=
ted
there. I probably should have subscribed to OpenOCD ML, but i'm too lazy to=
 do
so and will write here instead.

Basically, the thread had three participants:

*kristof mulier: wanted to get OpenOCD binaries for Windows, tried MSYS2, b=
ut
didn't get satisfactory results; posted a link to a guide for building Open=
OCD
with MSYS2, written by some 3rd party
*you: posted a link to a guild for building OpenOCD with Cygwin
*Liviu Ionescu: pointed out that you should be using mingw-w64, said that
Cygwin is prehistoric

Liviu Ionescu seems to be a Microsoft fanboy, since he advocated for the us=
e of
WSL (i already said earlier what i think of WSL). However, he wasn't wrong =
when
he said that you should use MinGW. If a piece of software can be built with
MinGW, then you generally should do so, unless there are specific reasons to
avoid that (compatibility, subtle porting bugs, etc). It seems to be the ca=
se
for OpenOCD.

kristof mulier seems to have weak developer-fu, and got a bit confused. The
MSYS2 guide that he used pointed to a MSYS2 package git repo, and kristof
assumed that the repo in question contained OpenOCD source code (which is
supposedly why he was getting an old version of OpenOCD compiled all the ti=
me).
That is not the case[0]. MSYS2 package repo contains small buildscripts for=
 the
appropriate packages. The reason he was getting an old version is that the
version (git revision, in case of OpenOCD-git) is hardcoded into PKGBUILD f=
ile
(which he didn't edit, uncritically following the guide; the author of the
guide didn't concern himself with getting OpenOCD from lastest git master H=
EAD,
and thus didn't mention that detail).

Therefore i still sand on my advice: either cross-compile from Cygwin, or t=
ry
MSYS2 (the irony here is that your Cygwin guide describes *almost exactly* =
how
one can build OpenOCD from MSYS2).

[0]: at least, i assume so; i don't really use MSYS2 repos or its package
manager, therefore i could be mistaken


--lYTy33frzfosJLtpHmdBqurEvKnt3L0Cl--

--5BUtGFshMagBFeUhyLlcOXApR4eE3F7Ss
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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=eRfy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--5BUtGFshMagBFeUhyLlcOXApR4eE3F7Ss--