Hello Andrey, > Then do not mix environments.
That is not my choice, but rather my supervisor's choice. I began engineering our new CMake-based build system purely with MinGW toolchains in mind, statically linked ones even since I already know how well-received it would be if I required people to install a MinGW environment and had them add it to their PATH. Then I was told we might have to abandon this new system if we can't keep using our Cygwin toolchains. I know it is very unwise to attempt this and entirely unproductive. > Cygwin with automation scripts. I wish that was good enough, but I'm supposed to make it work with all the GUI and integrated debugging capabilities the other toolchains have. It is so very frustrating. Back to the technical aspects: I just don't see why the current command line handling is supposed to be good. I find it to be very surprising as its entire purpose is interfacing with non-Cygwin software. Why should the "non-Cygwin" software assume the command line to be parsed according to Bash's rules? Best regards Oliver ________________________________ LÖWEN ENTERTAINMENT GmbH • Saarlandstraße 240 • 55411 Bingen am Rhein • Geschäftsführung: Christian Arras (Vorsitzender), Oliver Bagus, Dr. Daniel Henzgen • Vorsitz im Aufsichtsrat: Uwe Christiansen • Amtsgericht Mainz • HRB 23327 • USt.-IdNr. DE148266135 • WEEE-Reg.-Nr. DE 53361450 • Tel.: +49 6721 407 0 • E-Mail: [email protected] -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
