-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Christopher Faylor wrote: > I'm not sure that it makes the gcc package that much easier to develop > since, presumably, we'd be adding a new gcc mingw package which would > have to be kept in step with the cygwin gcc.
It will be easier because the Cygwin-specific patch will be much cleaner. Need the gcc and mingw32-gcc maintainers be the same? These will be two independent packages, just like the aformentioned possible i686-linux-gcc package could easily be done by someone else. It's possible that the gcc and mingw32-gcc release schedules may not be the same, due to individual requirements of each. > Don't forget that Cygwin itself uses it. That would require a change in > Cygwin's build, which I am, of course, willing to do. But you and Corinna won't be caught off-guard by this change. :-) Most others might, but I'm not convinced that it's our problem. Yaakov -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Cygwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFw4CCpiWmPGlmQSMRCH9QAKDgIv4jbXr0ZES5Uo69wxCFCNhPdwCeMwUk QJi2y6TE4w80M65hx6GzLdE= =D2jB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- 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/
