Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID: <20001221034647.26222.qmail@web118.yahoomail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 19:46:47 -0800 (PST)
From: Earnie Boyd <earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com>
Subject: Re: Cygwin 1.1.4:  unexpected "make" behaviour
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

--- Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 04:48:41PM -0800, Sammartino, Ryan wrote:
> >If you look at a slightly larger slice of the code
> >than diff -c provides, you'll see that this whole thing
> >is wrapped in a "#ifdef GCC_IS_NATIVE" directive, which is
> >set near the top of default.c:
> >
> >/* Define GCC_IS_NATIVE if gcc is the native development environment on
> >   your system (gcc/bison/flex vs cc/yacc/lex).  */
> >/* CYGNUS LOCAL: or __CYGWIN__ */
> >#if defined(__MSDOS__) || defined(__CYGWIN__)
> >#define GCC_IS_NATIVE
> >#endif
> >
> >
> >so it does seem to be a "cygnus only" thing.
> 
> Sorry, I don't understand your logic.  If GCC_IS_NATIVE, surely g++
> either be the default c++ compiler or someone had a reason for not
> making that the case.  AFAICT, you are modifying a section of make that
> is untouched by Cygnus/Red Hat.  It's under the control of a define
> which can be set in non-Cygwin conditions.  Roland McGrath obviously had
> a reason for doing this.  If it was wrong, then the make maintainer
> (psmith AT gnu DOT org) should apprised of that fact.
> 

And possibly the correct solution is to remove the `|| defined(__CYGWIN__)' in
this instance.  The probable case here is that back in version x a patch was
submitted that took effect in version y so that there is no Cygwin specific
change anymore.  It would be a Cygwin package maintainers job to see that such
code patches are submitted back to the source maintainer.

Cheers,

=====
Earnie Boyd
mailto:earnie_boyd AT yahoo DOT com

---         <http://earniesystems.safeshopper.com>         ---
--- Cygwin: POSIX on Windows <http://gw32.freeyellow.com/> ---
---   Minimalist GNU for Windows <http://www.mingw.org/>   ---

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/