On 10/23/2013 19:55, Earnie Boyd wrote: > On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 6:09 AM, JonY wrote: >> On 10/23/2013 13:49, Daniel Richard G. wrote: >>> It's a situation where the two "platforms" are not all that different--- >>> the system can run binaries from both---and avoiding the need to >>> rigorously cross-compile from one to the other is a big convenience. >>> >>> Obviously, Cygwin vs. MinGW programs is a different comparison from 32- >>> bit vs. 64-bit programs, but it's close enough to allow the same >>> argument to be made. >>> >> >> No close enough for you, stop this misinformation. You ARE already cross >> compiling, you cannot mix code from either platforms, even if they both >> run on Windows. > > JonY you forget to mention that what Daniel is trying to do has > already been tried once and long since abandoned in favor of using a > cross compiler. Remember the -mno-cygwin conglomeration of ugliness? >
Indeed it reeks of -mno-cygwin, I remember the Cygwin developers rejoicing when GCC support for it was finally dropped after all these years.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ config-patches mailing list config-patches@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/config-patches
