Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.0.20060428175532.05696608@surrey.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 18:04:03 +0100
To: "Dave Korn" <dave.korn@artimi.com>
From: Lloyd Wood <L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: Geomview & Cygwin setup
Cc: <cygwin@cygwin.com>
In-Reply-To: <000401c66ae3$0d4c6a30$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
References: <7.0.1.0.0.20060428165427.059e7e88@surrey.ac.uk>  <000401c66ae3$0d4c6a30$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com

At Friday 2006-04-28 17:44 +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>On 28 April 2006 17:07, Lloyd Wood wrote:
>
> > At Friday 2006-04-28 11:45 -0400, Williams, Gerald S \(Jerry\) wrote:
> >> If you need to find out what gcc is targeting, perhaps you should use
> >> "-dumpmachine" instead.
> >>
> >>  $ gcc -dumpmachine
> >>  i686-pc-cygwin
> >>  $ gcc -dumpmachine -mno-cygwin
> >>  i686-pc-mingw32
> >
> > Having identification behaviour dependent on a cygwin-specific flag
> > like this is.. insane.
>
>   When you use -mno-cygwin, you are invoking A DIFFERENT 
> compiler.  Having the
>*same* identification for two different compilers that target different
>targets would be insane.

But gee, that's exactly what gcc -v provides. A single identification 
for both compilers.

Why isn't there a gcc -v -mno-cygwin, then?

It's all positively minging. (Chris: note the usage tip. First g 
pronounced as j, so it's unlike any Chinese dynasties or Flash 
Gordon's nemesis.)

L.

--
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/