PING: Deprecation of -mno-cygwin.

Greg Chicares gchicares@sbcglobal.net
Mon Mar 23 14:27:00 GMT 2009


On 2009-03-23 14:00Z, Steve Thompson wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Dave Korn wrote:
> 
>>  It's a bit of a kludge compared to having a real honest-to-god
>> cross-compiler.  It's never worked entirely right in terms of keeping cygwin
>> and mingw headers and libs completely separate.  A full-blown mingw
>> cross-compiler won't cost that much in terms of disk space and the reliability
>> and correctness improvements will be worth it.
> 
> That's very interesting. I've been using -mno-cygwin for several years, 
> having done many many thousands of compiles and links using it, and I have 
> never had a problem with either headers or libraries! Is there a 
> recommended alternative?

The recommended alternative is the forthcoming mingw cross-compiler.

I think Yaakov's right to recommend a clean break with the past:

| >   $ i686-pc-cygwin-gcc -mno-cygwin	<- Spits out a warning
|
| Please, NO!  -mno-cygwin needs to go away already.

which would put all the confusion to rest. If the i386-pc-mingw32
true cross-compiler is gcc-4.x, then much code will have to be
changed anyway because of stricter diagnostics; it's actually
kinder IMO to force makefiles to change at the same time, by
treating -m[no-]cygwin as an error.

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/



More information about the Cygwin mailing list