DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:message-id:date:from:to:cc:subject; q=dns; s=
	default; b=A1NzVbJeNJ/q07ySmQl+dYhMtfYq/U02H2JP018Ap0Fi3qT+9TzfT
	rdbZKUZPHmaJWuoO7RivHEqKKnIx54Yqug4gk2e3xcAw93b1YzR+pFhO6c+FTaa/
	9ODlgIzMFy51TQUzTXKtt6ZOaeXbX+rtDQmkPAx/6sTGK22foxjkEw=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Message-ID: <20130405143711.3384@binki>
Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 14:37:11 +0900
From: wynfield AT gmail DOT com
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
cc:
Subject: It does involve cygwin


Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 02:59:01PM -0400, Eliot Moss wrote:
> >On 4/4/2013 2:40 PM, Eliot Moss wrote:
> ....snipped
> If you have to enter MinGW land to perform what the OP wants then that
> is a really clear indication that this is off-topic.

That is illogical, just because the very good advice above explains a method of how it could be done using another system, does not make it irrelavant to cygwin.   That's like saying compiling can be done with Microsoft C, so  gcc is not relevant to cygwin.

> I think we've seen an adequate amount of advice for how the OP can
> proceed.  There was a suggestion that one could look at the disassembled
> output from gcc to see how it does things.  That's probably the best
> advice for how to proceed, regardless of the platform.
Does this mean that you'll honor your word and take it off line to answer practical questions regarding this issue?


- end

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple