Greg Chicares wrote: > On 2009-01-28 02:21Z, Charles Wilson wrote: >> Pursuant to a discussion on the libtool list, I'm trying to get a feel >> for how many cygwin users rely on the cygwin environment to drive the >> *native* MinGW gcc compiler. > > I use the native MinGW compiler in a Cygwin environment, > successfully, many hours every day.
A few additional questions, then: Do you use gnu-style configured projects (autoconf, automake, libtool, all that?) -- or some other build framework? Do you use cygwin's make (which version?), mingw32-make, or perhaps a cygwin build of msys's csmake/cpmake? Do you use gcc's -M* options for generating dependencies -- with mingw-gcc, these rules will be in dos format and cygwin-make-3.81 doesn't grok them? What about creating static libraries? If you use mingw's ar.exe, do you use explicit `cygpath` rules to convert unix paths to the DOS paths that version of ar can understand, or some other technique? For a hint about why I started this thread, and why I am asking these questions, see http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libtool-patches/2009-01/msg00163.html -- especially my failures with $ export PATH="/c/MinGW/bin:$PATH" $ ../libtool/configure --build=i686-pc-cygwin --host=mingw32 This led to a suggestion that "--build=cygwin --host=mingw32" should always be interpreted as: mingw32-gcc is a cygwin-hosted cross compiler, NOT the native MinGW-project supported gcc (and if it IS the native MinGW one, expect breakage). I'm not sure such a sweeping statement is accurate, or wise -- will that assumption break people's exising (working) setups? -- Chuck -- 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/
