This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Is -mno-cygwin support being removed???? (What th'?)
- To: cygwin at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: Is -mno-cygwin support being removed???? (What th'?)
- From: David Robinow <drobinow at yahoo dot com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 08:12:59 -0700 (PDT)
--- Chris Faylor <email@example.com> wrote:
> If I am understanding this correctly, it sounds like
> there is a newer
> version of mingw which should be merged back into
> the cygwin
> distribution. Either that or I should just rip out
> all of this mingw
> stuff and let the mingw maintainers deal with the
mingw, cygwin, fltk, and I think (I don't use it) V,
are all under continuous development.
> Why is it that no one has mentioned this "new
> version" of mingw in the
> last two months? If this solves the ills of all of
> the -mno-cygwin
> users then why are we wasting our time tracking down
> the problems that
> people are reporting? Why are the cygwin
> maintainers taking heat for
> being "unresponsive" if there is an actual solution
The solution was unknown until the recent post by
> I don't mind making a new gcc release myself but I
> sure don't want to
> have to be a detective, tracking down stuff that I'm
> not particularly
> interested in. With Mumit gone is anyone interested
> in taking the
> responsibility for this stuff? I don't see any
> reason for me to worry
> about it if there is already solutions but no one
> has been proactive
> enough to inform the readers of
> firstname.lastname@example.org until
I believe, I'm just guessing here, that Mumit saw no
reason to continually update the -mnocygwin support
when there was a relatively good 20.1 solution already
and nothing was broken. I speculate that this would
have all been straightened out a month ago except that
Mumit Khan's absence unfortuitously coincided with a
major Cygwin upgrade. The mingw people are
unfortunately in the same somewhat helpless situation
as Cygwin in that they have relied on one individual,
Mumit Khan, for the Cygwin integration.
This whole situation has been exacerbated by the fact
that FLTK has just had another release and is fast
approaching a new major upgrade to 2.0.
As a user, but alas not much of a contributor, of
these products, I appreciate all your hard work and
understand if people get a bit grumpy during critical
periods. It would be nice though if everybody could
calm down a bit.
> Probably the best solution is to forward all
> -mno-cygwin requests to
> the the mingw mailing list where they belong.
I don't know how much my opinion, as a
non-contributor, matters, but this actually seems like
a good idea to me.
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2000 at 07:26:36AM -0700, Earnie
> Boyd wrote:
> >IMHO, this is the correct way to support this
> >> Dale Goudey
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints!
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to email@example.com