From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jeffdbREMOVETHIS@netzone.com (Mikey) To: Jan-Jaap van der Heijden , gnu-win32@cygnus.com Subject: Re: Problems with mingw32 GCC 2.8.0 !!! Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 15:02:00 -0000 Message-id: <34d09b2b.11419585@smtp.netzone.com> References: X-SW-Source: 1998-01/msg00696.html Well let's get cygnus to change to -windows, -dll that way you could use gcc (for mingw32 console) gcc -windows (for mingw32 GUI exe's) gcc -dll (for mingw32 console dll's) gcc -windows -dll (for mingw32 GUI dll's) gcc -posix (for cygwin32 console) gcc -posix -dll (for cygwin32 dll's) Didn't Geoff say that B19 or B20 was going to be native win32 with a posix extension? Anyone can do this for themselves obviously, but it's much easier to upgrade if you can get it into the FSF sources. CC="gcc -posix" ./configure --options (for unix software) ( or maybe setup autoconf to do it for us where necessary) make cc=gcc (for vc++ software) It's pretty ridiculous ask developers to maintain ~40MB of extra compiler tools, when you can do the same thing with a few hundred bytes extra in the specs file ;^) The first goal of any gcc port is to be able to replace the native compiler. (in this case nmake/cl/link/lib/rc) Which egcs-mingw32 is already pretty close to. I would consider mingw32 a port, as opposed to cygwin32 which is actually an emulation library, able to replace the posix subsystem on NT and add a posix subsystem on 9x. (with a MUCH better one ;) Not I hasten to add that I'm taking anything away from cygnus, without that, we wouldn't have this ;^) Thanks Guys!!! On Wed, 28 Jan 1998 20:57:10 +0000 (WET), you wrote: >On Wed, 28 Jan 1998, Mumit Khan wrote: > >> jeffdbREMOVETHIS@netzone.com (Mikey) writes: >> > Jan, Colin, Mumit, Geoff, and all other developers/maintainers >> > >> > using -mXXX is a very BAD idea for a gcc option. >> > >> > -m is reserved for processor specifications >> >> That's what the docs say as well, but Kenner has the final say as >> FSF's GCC maintainer. >> >> JJ: did Kenner say why he wanted it this way? > >Kenner himself changed "-windows" to "-mwindows". This was probably for >the sake of compatibility with cygwin32. > >When I couldn't talk him out of that, I argued that "-dll" should be >renamed to "-mdll" to be consistent . BTW: I have seen *.lreg files >around when linking a dll, so the compiler was confused with "-dl" >(preform a debug dump). I never bothered to make it reproducable. > >Most -mXXX options deal with target hardware dependant switches, and >I agree that neither "-mwindows" nor "-mdll" is one of those. > > JanJaap > >--- >With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not >necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going >to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly >overhead. -- RFC1925. > ===================================================== Linux a platform built by, and for users, standing on the firm legs of reliability, and speed. Microsoft Windows, a platform without a leg to stand on. (jeffdbREMOVETHIS@netzone.com) delete REMOVETHIS from the above to reply Mikey - For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "gnu-win32-request@cygnus.com" with one line of text: "help".