This is the mail archive of the cygwin-apps mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: gcc4: next release

On 7/7/2010 21:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Jul 7 21:19, JonY wrote:
On 7/7/2010 20:58, Christopher Faylor wrote:
On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 02:39:19PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Oh, and, talking about /opt or /usr, I'd prefer the above /usr/mingw*
sysroot idea.  However, I don't like the idea in the least to keep
two different versions of w32api around.  It's one target, so we should
have one set of headers only.  Right?  Wrong?  None of that?

Unfortunately, it sounds like we've stepped into the middle of a dispute between the mingw folks and the mingw64 folks. Maybe the best thing for us to do would be to decide to use only one or the other but not both.


Here are some of the technical issues. [...] As for mingw-w64 headers API, it does not support anything lower than XP, Win2K is not supported, different from's Win9X compatibility.

How do you do that? The XP functionality is a superset of the W2K functionality, which in turn is a superset of the NT4 functionality. So, in theory, headers supporting XP should support any earlier system(*).


(*) Note that I ignore 95/98/Me deliberately since they deserve to be


_WIN32_WINNT by default is set to 0x501, there are no ifdef guards for anything lower. So if you wanted to limit yourself to win2k functionality, there isn't a practical way to do it other than looking up MSDN.

So while it may work on win2k, but if you do accidentally use XP specific functionality like some of newer network API functions, your program crashes on win2K.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]