John Ericson <l...@johnericson.me> writes: > Thanks Jacob, > > That's absolutely right that Win NT supports multiple personalities > and so all sorts of things are possible. (Indeed that is how WSL1 > worked.) > > MinGW stands for "Minimalist GNU for Windows" [1], and I suspect that > is why Saleem choose windows-gnu in that commit almost a decade ago. I > supposed we could say that "minimalist GNU" is not "GNU", and do > windows-mingnu or something, and then I could submit an LLVM patch to > try to support that. But I suppose I lean towards support configs that > at least one of GCC or Clang supports already, rather than making up > completely new stuff.
GNU config is part of the GNU project, developing the GNU operating system, which opted for ``mingw'' many, many moons ago. We are under no obligation to adhere to LLVM standards, especially when they require us to misrepresent the nature of a specific system configuration. > Also, I would like to point out that the "scales to more variations" > argument is not at all hypothetical. If one looks at [2] one will see > that MSYS is a variation of Cygwin, and a mingw-style environments can > be made from the newer ucrt or older msvcrt. Today there are just too > many subtle variations to capture them all with sensible. It looks > like MSYS [3] reuses a triple for multiple configurations, and just > relies on users getting the PATH right, but that clearly isn't > ideal. Creating windows-* variants to handle them all in a consistent > and predictable manner is much better. We can create new triplets for new environments once they do come into existence. But they should not duplicate existing ones, and they must conform to the existing naming convention for configuration triplets.
