From: khan AT xraylith DOT wisc DOT edu (Mumit Khan)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: DJGPP: the future is... ?
Date: 1 Apr 1999 22:31:20 GMT
Organization: Center for X-ray Lithography, UW-Madison
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <7e0s3o$la0$1@news.doit.wisc.edu>
References: <199903260517 DOT AAA32193 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <199903262227 DOT RAA23518 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <36FF492E DOT FE40F937 AT ecn DOT nl> <36ff974a DOT 1523148 AT news3 DOT ibm DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: modi.xraylith.wisc.edu
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

In article <36ff974a DOT 1523148 AT news3 DOT ibm DOT net>, Mark E. <snowball3 AT usa DOT net> wrote:
>
>Mingw32 is a useful start for a Win32 compiler which doesn't have the
>license restrictions that Cygwin has. It currently uses Microsoft's libc,
>which means that porting GNU tools will be hard. What mingw32 needs is its
>own libc with as much Unix compatibility as possible, say a port of
>DJGPP's, or perhaps even GNU's libc. Once that is done, porting the GNU
>software should then be possible. But as DJ previously said, it isn't
>something he can be involved in since he's already doing much the same
>thing for Cygwin.

Please just call it something else other than Mingw32. Mingw32 is going to
keep on using native runtime; you can always write a port library that
goes along with it (sort of the like a grand -liberty ;-), but the runtime
will not change.

I don't understand the comment "It currently uses Microsoft's libc, which 
means that porting GNU tools will be hard.".  MS provides an ANSI (with
sprinkles of POSIX) libc, which in turn contains the math library. Why
reinvent the wheel? Just write a posix library on top like Cygwin did, 
and release it under your favored licensing terms.

Regards,
Mumit