From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13769 invoked by alias); 2 Mar 2007 17:50:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 13758 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Mar 2007 17:50:19 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from main.gmane.org (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (80.91.229.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 17:50:10 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HNBo1-0001Ma-2n for ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 18:44:33 +0100 Received: from c-76-17-154-185.hsd1.mn.comcast.net ([76.17.154.185]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 18:44:33 +0100 Received: from grante by c-76-17-154-185.hsd1.mn.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 02 Mar 2007 18:44:33 +0100 To: ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com From: Grant Edwards Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 17:50:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <45E8561D.3050204@siva.com.mk> <200703021757.03282.neundorf@kde.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: slrn/0.9.8.1 (Linux) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: [ECOS] Re: eCos on Windows without Cygwin X-SW-Source: 2007-03/txt/msg00048.txt.bz2 On 2007-03-02, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > On Friday 02 March 2007 17:51, Ilija Koco wrote: > ... >> Yes, probably in large companies the managers and not engineers make >> decisions, but maybe, if there's demand, someone will see competitive >> advantage in porting tools to Linux. > > Sometimes even the actual developers working with eCos prefer > Windows. So IMO Oyvind is not completely wrong here. Making it > easier to develop for eCos under Windows (i.e. without cygwin) > wouldn't be bad. Nobody's said it would be bad. We are are saying that expecting Linux users to do it is a bit unrealistic: 1) we don't know how 2) we've got other things we'd rather do 3) most of us don't really care >From what I can tell the eCos maintainers all use Linux as do most of the experienced users. If you wanted to pony up £100,000 or so, I'm sure eCosCentric (or somebody) could be contracted to cobble up a Windows development environment that doesn't depend so much on Cygwin. It's still going to have to include bash, Gnu make, TCL, etc. I suppose you could try to use "native" Win32 clones of those tools (do such things exist). So it's not going to be much simpler than a frozen subset of Cygwni anyway... -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! I'm having an at EMOTIONAL OUTBURST!! But, visi.com uh, WHY is there a WAFFLE in my PAJAMA POCKET?? -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss