RE: New package behaviour of setup.ini

["Dave Korn" <dave.korn@artimi.com>]

Christopher Faylor wrote on 09 September 2008 19:59:

> On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 02:35:23PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 07:01:31PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>>> Christopher Faylor wrote on 09 September 2008 18:51:
>>>> On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 06:45:51PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>>>> Btw, does this version remove the -mno-cygwin option?  If so, I may
>>>> have to leave work early so that I can have a celebratory beverage.
>>> 
>>> Sorry :( no beer for you today.  It's a fairly straight build of
>>> released 4.3.0 with just a bit of patching for shared libgcc etc.
>>> 
>>> Anyway, I'll be doing the upload later tonight after I get home from
>>> work.  I thought it unlikely that the category settings would be
>>> persisted, but don't want to get caught out by making a dumb
>>> assumption....  if at all possible ...
>> 
>> I thought the next version of gcc was not going to perpetuate the
>> -mno-cygwin madness.  I'd really prefer not releasing a version with
>> this option even if it is just commented out.

  This is truely experimental stuff, but if it works well I'm planning to move
very fast to a 4.3.2 release, so I'll patch it out there; but I've kept
everyone waiting more than long enough and have limited free time.

> Btw, Dave, do you want me to sponsor you as one of the new
> cygwin-on-windows maintainers?  I was suggesting Kai Tietz as another
> alternative for MinGW.  It would be nice to have an active Cygwin
> maintainer as well.

  Yes please!  Modulo the above mentioned resource constraints, but I'm still
more than glad to help out.

  Stand back.  Here it comes ...

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....