On 13 Oct 2003 at 12:00, Edward Peschko wrote:
[snip]
>
>
> In other words, depending how you look at it, mingw is defining less
> crucial information, or cygwin is defining more junk. And sometimes
> they define the same stuff differently.
>
> In any case, the toolsets are incompatible. And this is just the tip
> of the iceberg; If mingw's compiler is doing *anything* different from
> cygwin, and the users of large mingw projects are testing versus
> mingw, then the using of cygwin will result in binaries with annoying,
> hard-to-find bugs.
Umm...that's not exactly true...I think I can speak from experience on this,
being someone who develops
using Cygwin (with and w/o -mno-cygwin), Mingw and Msys on a very regular basis
(maintaining all of those ports for
two or three, functionally different, APIs).
Paul G.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
