X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Date:	Wed, 31 Jan 2007 08:31:02 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Eliminating -mno-cygwin from gcc?
Message-ID:	<20070131133102.GA17405@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<20070131131337 DOT GA17256 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <45C0971E DOT 4080305 AT byu DOT net> <20070131132700 DOT GA3478 AT implementation DOT labri DOT fr>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<20070131132700.GA3478@implementation.labri.fr>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.11
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 02:27:00PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>Eric Blake, le Wed 31 Jan 2007 06:18:22 -0700, a ?crit :
>> I would much rather call the cross-compiler i686-mingw-gcc than the
>> current name of 'gcc -mno-cygwin'.
>
>Same for me.

Thinking about this some more, it seems like we'd need a real
cygwin-based mingw cross compiler rather than a wrapped mingw compiler
since otherwise there would be path and signal issues.

And, as long as we're talking about cross-compilers, a cygwin -> linux
cross compiler would probably be nice, too.

cgf

--
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/

- Raw text -