Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: fixup-cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com@fixme
From: "Paul Garceau" <pgarceau AT qwest DOT net>
Organization: New Dawn Productions
To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 16:31:00 -0700
Subject: -mno-cygwin deprecation
Reply-to: Paul Garceau <pgarceau AT qwest DOT net>
Message-ID: <3AE5AA44.11911.C62060@localhost>
In-reply-to: <3AE2EC6F.1D5DA06F@yahoo.com>
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.12c)



On 22 Apr 2001, at 10:36, the Illustrious Earnie Boyd wrote:

> Paul Garceau wrote: 
> > 
> >         I would agree with Chris...not to "deprecate", as Earnie
> >         states, but
> > to discourage the use of -mno-cygwin for anyone not familiar enough
> > with the differences between using -mno-cygwin vs not using -mno-
> > cygwin.
> >         There has been a *ell of a lot of work put in to getting
> >         -mno-cygwin
> > to work over the years.  I don't believe that effort should be wasted
> > by eliminating (or "deprecating", as Earnie puts it) the -mno-cygwin
> > switch.

	Deprecating is far better than deleting for as long as the switch 
remains well documented.

	At least by deprecating -mno-cygwin, we would be encouraging those 
folks who wanted to use the -mno-cygwin switch to instead use Mingw, 
thereby removing a great deal of the support requirements for -mno-
cygwin for the current maintainer of that switch.  This is always a 
good thing...less time spent on maintaining -mno-cygwin more time spent 
on doing what they need and want to do.

	The flipside of this, of course, is that there would be an increase in 
the amount of questions about using the -mno-cygwin switch...of course, 
since Mingw and Cygwin are in fact two different tool sets...the Mingw 
folks can encourage people to not ask questions about Cygwin under the 
mingw mailing list.  Problem solved...

  -mno-cygwin continues to exist within Cygwin
  Mingw gets a boost to its user base...

  Seems like a win-win situation to me...What do you think, Earnie?


	Peace,

		Paul G.


Nothing real can be threatened.
    Nothing unreal exists.