Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com X-Envelope-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com X-Comment-To: Andrew Begel To: "Andrew Begel" Cc: "Charles Wilson" , , Subject: Re: MinGW compilation on Windows References: From: Dmitry Bely Date: 26 Oct 2001 16:56:21 +0400 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Lines: 46 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Academic Rigor) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Andrew Begel writes: > That's not the problem. MinGW doesn't pretend to do more than it > advertises; simply a gcc that accepts both windows and unix style > paths, So "gcc -mno-cygwin" does, as well as any other Cygwin application which accepts c:/cygwin/usr/local/test.c c:\cygwin\usr\local\test.c /cygdrive/c/cygwin/usr/local/test.c /usr/local/test.c A bit more flexible than Mingw, isn't it? :-) > and produces executables that link with Microsoft libraries > rather than cygwin1.dll. The build environment that MS provides is > pretty crappy. I'm porting Linux apps, and I like cygwin's unixy side > for development. I just need the apps to be compiled without > cygwin. (Oh, did I mention these were C++ apps that I'm making? Those > require MinGW's g++ compiler, unless cygwin is now distribution > (again) the C++ support libraries/headers for MinGW?) Again, what is the problem with "gcc -mno-cygwin", if mingw-build C++ libraries are supplied? [...] > Yes, I want a), but I want to use MinGW's gcc compiler, not Cygwin's > cross compiler. You have not convinced me that you *really* need Mingw-build gcc. > Since the include directories are different (see > above) I need to distinguish between the two at some point in the > configure/compile process.... You needn't. All paths that Mingw-build gcc accepts is also acceptable for Cygwin-build gcc (no matter is -mno-cygwin flag used or not). As for your application sources (XEmacs or whatever), they should *not* rely on the place where the system include files resides. If they do, it's very bad programming style, if not to say more ... Hope to hear from you soon, Dmitry