Cygwin x86 end-of-life

Corinna Vinschen
Mon Nov 21 12:45:09 GMT 2022

On Nov 18 12:30, Brian Inglis wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Nov 2022 15:51:34 +0000, Jon Turney wrote:
> > On 14/11/2022 21:29, Jason Pyeron wrote:
> > > Can I throw resources at a solution? If so what?
> > Sure, if that's what you want to do.
> > According surveys, 32-bit Windows has a fraction of 1% market share, and
> > declining. Our own (limited) metrics are in accord with that, so I
> > basically see any time I spend on this as wasted.
> > So, the first resource you'll need provide is manpower.
> The decision makes sense with those numbers.
> Do we have numbers to say what the situation is with Windows mingw64-i686 crosses?
> Should we also be dropping those at the same time, if there is only 1% use
> of that platform?
> In which case, we should announce that, and add that to the EoL notices.

A cygwin -> i686-w64-mingw32 cross is an entirely different beast.
It's kind of like a cygwin -> sparc-sun-sunos4 cross, or a cygwin ->
riscv-*-* cross.  Either of them is a perfectly valid toolchain, hosted
on Cygwin, targeting some foreign CPU/machine combination.

As long as the cross toolchain has a maintainer, it's ok, isn't it?


More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list