On Sat, Nov 18, 2000 at 05:26:32AM -0800, Mo DeJong wrote:
>On 18 Nov 2000, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>
>> On Nov 17, 2000, Eric Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > So a solaris cross cygwin compiler would define EXEEXT to be .exe,
>> > however, OBJEXT would be .o because it was compiled
On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 02:51:47AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>On Nov 20, 2000, Ralf Corsepius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I suppose a compiler that targets Cygwin will create .obj object files
>>> regardless of its host platform.
>
>> Hmm, I don't think so.
>
>I stand corrected. Anyone can
On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 05:14:25PM +0100, Peter Simons wrote:
>Hi everybody,
>
>due to a change of jobs, I am losing access to research.cys.de -- the
>current home of the autoconf macro archive. I could in fact move the
>archive to some other site (http://cryp.to/), but I wonder whether it
>wouldn
On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 09:51:23AM -0800, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>--- Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 05:14:25PM +0100, Peter Simons wrote:
>> >Hi everybody,
>> >
>> >due to a change of jobs, I am losing access to rese
We've made a change in the newest version of cygwin that stops the
Windows headers from being searched unless a -mwin32 option is specified
on the gcc command line. This option also causes Windows options like
"WIN32" to be defined automatically.
We've done this to make porting easier for some p
On Wed, Mar 07, 2001 at 11:49:07PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>On Mar 7, 2001, Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Basically, I think we need something like a AC_PROG_GCC_USES_MWIN32.
>
>I have mixed feelings about having this macro in autoconf. On one
On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 10:49:33PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
>cygwin, win32
>cygwin, nowin32
>no cygwin (aka mingw32), win32
>no cygwin, nowin32
-mno-cygwin and -mnowin32 is not an allowed combination.
Please, let's not complicate this. The only thing required is a check
for -mwin32.
I'm no
On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 03:47:44AM -0500, Charles S. Wilson wrote:
>Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 7, 2001, Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Basically, I think we need something like a AC_PROG_GCC_USES_MWIN32.
>>
>>
On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 09:23:46AM -0500, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 8, 2001, "Charles S. Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > So, by absorbing AC_PROG_GCC_USES_MWIN32, are you helping the GPL half,
>> > or the proprietary half?
>>
>> > By refusing to absorb
On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 03:15:06PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>On Mar 8, 2001, Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Another problem is the package maintainers (if they exist) will be slow
>> to adapt to the new option and we'll be answering this
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 11:29:34PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
>Neato.. But can we put CFLAGS="$WIN32FLAGS $CFLAGS" or will that break
>other things? AFAIK (Chris - any comment) the -mwin32 needs to go
>first..
It breaks builds from the gcc or gdb build trees which override CFLAGS
from the top l
On Thu, Mar 15, 2001 at 10:27:45PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
>just a note: another reason that LDFLAGS etc aren't changed, is that
>it's not needed:
>
>(from the gcc specs file entry *cpp:
>
>%{mwin32:-DWIN32 -D_WIN32 -D__WIN32 -D__WIN32__ -DWINNT -idirafter
>/usr/include/w32api}
>)
>
>Of cours
On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 12:54:01AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
>> I still don't think all of this fuss is really worth it but I'm going
>to
>> add my 29 cents worth in this thread.
>>
>> AISI, what is needed is only whether or not the the compiler supports
>a
>> -mwin32 switch. Then the configur
On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 09:12:57AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
>- Original Message -
>From: "Christopher Faylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 2:29 AM
>Subject: Re: updated win32
On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 09:56:43AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
>So in a nutshell, because some packages change CFLAGS, and others change
>CC, we require everyone to change their Makefiles ?
>
>I agree that overriding CC is bad - thats why it was changed to CFLAGS.
>But CFLAGS is the standard way
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 07:48:39PM +0100, Gary V. Vaughan wrote:
>On Thursday 12 April 2001 11:13 am, Akim Demaille wrote:
>> > "Alexandre" == Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> Alexandre> On Apr 11, 2001, Akim Demaille <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> Given that we want to prom
On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 01:43:11PM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
>Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Do any of you know of reasonably modern systems
>> that do *not* support fchdir?
>
>It's broken in Cygwin, at least for 1.3.6-6. See:
>
>http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin/2002-01/msg00963.html
On Mon, Mar 03, 2003 at 07:52:52PM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
>Christopher Faylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> >It's broken in Cygwin, at least for 1.3.6-6. See:
>>
>> Quoting a year-old message hardly qualifies as "broken on cygwin".
&g
On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 11:21:34AM -0500, Wayne Scott wrote:
>I have been debugging a problem in Windows under the Cygwin enviroment,
>where a autoconf configure script would fail to run correctly if the
>user executing the script was not the same person that installed
>cygwin.
That's an indicatio
19 matches
Mail list logo
