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 (Dave Korn we need you)

On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 10:22:17AM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 08:58 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> 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.
>It does seem that there is a debate -- but I'm not part of it.  My only
>involvement with either the last few days is fixing cygport for
>cross-compilers and cross-compiling.
>That being said, I see the technical arguments for allowing both
>toolchains (provided someone steps up and packages a version).
> software is still widespread, and as JonY mentioned they
>are not fully compatible.  OTOH mingw-w64, besided providing the only
>64bit option, also has certain advantages which warrant a 32bit version
>as well.

But we're talking about the Cygwin community here.  If we provide two
different versions of the same thing we'll be clarifying forever.  And,
when I use humor after I've clarified to the same person three times in
a row, we'll have a long thread about how mean I am for not answering
the poor guy's question.  No one wants that.

I really wish Dave was here to weigh in.

>Here's my question, though: given the incompatibilities mentioned, would
>a cygwin1.dll built with i686-w64-cygwin (mingw-w64) toolchain be 100%
>compatible with current and past releases built with i686-pc-cygwin
>( toolchain?  If not, then we need both.

Is someone talking about a i686-w64-cygwin compiler?  I thought this was
entirely mingw.


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