Re: Cross Compiler Unix - Windows

[Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please@cygwin.com>]

On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 10:19:36AM +0300, Kai Ruottu wrote:
>Dave Korn wrote:
>>>What becomes to Cygwin and MinGW, the same attitude as followed with
>>>Linux, that "producing any apps for Windoze should happen only on
>>>Windoze, or that when one does it on some other host, it still should
>>>happen just like on Windoze!", is totally weird to me.
>>
>>It seems weird to me too.  Especially considering that at least one of
>>the main cygwin developers builds everything on linux with a
>>linux-x-windows toolchain.  So perhaps you have misunderstood the
>>situation with cygwin; cross-development is certainly possible, and
>>_intended_ to be possible.  It certainly isn't any kind of policy to
>>_deliberately_ make development only possible on native hosts.
>
>Recommending Cygwin for 'ordinary users' as the preferred place for
>building GNU apps for Windoze, sounds weird.  Just as doing the same
>with MinGW/MSYS.  The developers can have Linuces etc.  better
>platforms available and may require to produce everything for Linux
>etc.  first and for Windoze too...  Only building can be enough, no
>very hard testing or debugging in order to get the application to work
>is expected...

So, you think that when people need to build windows apps, the
"recommendation" should be that people should buy a linux box, put their
sources on the linux box, figure out where to get or how to build a
cross compiler, build the sources, and then figure out how to transfer
the sources to the windows platform.

The alternative is to install Cygwin or MSYS and then just build your
sources without worrying about linux, cross compilers, or how to transfer
software to/from windows.

Ever heard of Occam's razor?

>This is quite the same as recommending people to build their own sport
>cars from Volkswagens in garages instead of doing this in car factories
>because only real Porches will be built in factories.  People keep
>their self-built cars there so of course these must be built there.  Or
>something...

I have no idea what this analogy is trying to say but, again, recommending
to people that they go out of their way not to build on the platform that
they are targetting is clearly not the most straightforward or foolproof
plan.

>If one wants to produce tens of binutils, GCCs etc.  GNU stuff for the
>Windoze host, the native Windoze shouldn't be the recommendation.  Not
>at least when the recommendation comes from Red Hat or from any other
>Linux company.  If Red Hat delivers the Cygwin tools for only the
>Windoze host, what else this is than a recommendation to use Windoze
>instead of their own Linux for the Windoze target development?

Huh?  What does "Red Hat" have to do with anything?  "Red Hat" doesn't
provide the tools.  Cygwin is a volunteer effort.  The fact that you can
build cross compilers from some other system to windows doesn't mean
that Cygwin is at fault for not providing the cross compilers.  The
whole *point* of Cygwin is to provide a linux-like environment for
Windows.

The fact that I do build the cygwin release on linux doesn't mean that
I'd recommend doing this to every person who wants to compile stuff for
Windows.
--
Christopher Faylor			spammer? ->	aaaspam@sourceware.org
Cygwin Co-Project Leader				aaaspam@duffek.com
TimeSys, Inc.