PING: Deprecation of -mno-cygwin.
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
More information about the Cygwin