public inbox for cygwin-talk@cygwin.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tomasz Pona <koczis@parasoft.com>
To: <cygwin-talk@cygwin.com>
Subject: Re: GCC 4.8 & cygwin32 vs. cygwin64 packages and installers
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2015 13:18:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55F18327.406@parasoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55F17503.10209@gmail.com>

 > wrong mailing list.
 > You should use for this question cygwin "at" cygwin "dot" com
 >
Since "cygwin-talk" is described as "The Vulgar and Unprofessional..." 
I'd better stay with it :)

 > cygwin32-gcc is a cross compiler from X86_64 to i686
 > cygwin64-gcc is a cross compiler from i686 to x86_64
 >
This explains me everything except the versions available: 4.8 is still 
available as cross-compilers, but not as the standard one.



W dniu 2015-09-10 o 14:18, Marco Atzeri pisze:
> On 10/09/2015 13:23, Tomasz Pona wrote:
>> Hello All,
>>
>> I've been writing the Cygwin list ages ago, so welcome again.
>
> wrong mailing list.
> You should use for this question cygwin "at" cygwin "dot" com
>>
>> For many years since my last visit I haven't bumped into any Cygwin
>> problem I couldn't cope with myself, so many thanks to all Cygwin devels
>> for your good job.
>> But now I run into a real problem with GNU GCC packages availability and
>> how they're presented in the installer.
>>
>> My GCC availablity problem:
>> I need to work with GCC 4.8, but it isn't available anymore for
>> download. I uderstand obviousness of the versions succession, but the
>> upgrade to 4.9 was done only recently and the choice is between 4.9.2
>> and 4.9.3. I'd say this isn't significant version change. It'd be nice
>> to have a choice at least between 4.8 and 4.9 and great to be able to
>> work with several versions (since ~4.6) at once.
>
> As cygwin is a rolling distri, maintaing multi compilers
> will be very demanding.
>
>>
>> My installer package presentation problem:
>> I noticed the GCC 4.8 is still available as "cygwin64-gcc-" under
>> "setup-x86" and as "cygwin32-gcc" under "setup-x86_64".
>> But I can't take any advantage of this, because:
>> - these packages land in separate cygwin/cygwin64 folders, like the'd be
>> installed using the other installer
>> - "setup-x86" has no "cygwin32-gcc-"
>> - "setup-x86_64" has no "cygwin64-gcc-"
>> Why GCC 4.8 isn't available as a default package when it is as
>> "cygwin32-gcc-"/"cygwin64-gcc-"?
>
> cygwin32-gcc is a cross compiler from X86_64 to i686
> cygwin64-gcc is a cross compiler from i686 to x86_64
> gcc is the standard compiler available in both arch X86_64 and i686
>
>>
>> Maybe you could just loosen the package presentation/availability rules
>> in your installers?
>>
>>
>> Thanks in advance for any response,
>> Tomasz Pona
>
>

  reply	other threads:[~2015-09-10 13:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-09-10 11:23 Tomasz Pona
2015-09-10 12:18 ` Marco Atzeri
2015-09-10 13:18   ` Tomasz Pona [this message]
2015-09-10 14:10     ` Warren Young
2015-09-10 14:46       ` Tomasz Pona

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=55F18327.406@parasoft.com \
    --to=koczis@parasoft.com \
    --cc=cygwin-talk@cygwin.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).