William Sheehan wrote:
Christopher Faylor wrote:
There is no advantage using cygwin if you want to use a Makefile
>> which contains MS-DOS paths. Using MinGW
>> makes perfect sense in that case.
I strongly disagree with this statement. A primary benefit of using Cygwin
is that so many Linux-like tools are available from one central installer.
If you have a Makefile system that uses Cygwin for more than just the make
binary and binutils (aka more than what MinGW provides), it becomes
irritating to developers that they need to install at least two software
products (Cygwin and MinGW in this case) and create special path voodoo just
for one product.
I disagree with both of you.
I use Cygwin tools, including Gnu make, to build an ocean model. This
system supports both Cygwin (g95-cygwin) and non-Cygwin (Compaq,
g95-mingw) Fortran compilers. (These days I use g95-cygwin mostly, but
there are good reasons to support the others.)
I don't use Mingw make because the build system was developed on Unix
and I just don't want the grief of porting it to a naked Windows system.
BUT I wasn't bitten by the removal of Windows mode in make, because I
always run make in Unix mode. Make doesn't generally see the Windows
paths. When I need to pass Windows path to the non-Cygwin compilers, I
create them on the fly with cygpath. This does require a little care
with quoting, but I've managed to sort out all the problems I've
encountered.
I won't go into more detail, but I have posted examples of this in the
past on this list.
--
Mark Hadfield "Kei puwaha te tai nei, Hoea tahi tatou"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
National Institute for Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA)
--
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/
