-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 20/04/16 02:22 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote: > On 20/04/16 19:17, Mike Frysinger wrote: >> agreed ... we have kernel_Winnt & elibc_Winnt already. i >> think those represent a mingw environment (vs a cygwin env). > Surely 'winnt' is a somewhat out-of-date and potentially > confusing flag? Can't we migrate to a win32 and win64 as > pertaining to current/recent architectures, and directly relating > to mingw32 and mingw64 or such-like?! > > Sooner or later win32 is going to be EOL (as the operating > systems themselves soon will be) ... >
kernel_Winnt may seem old but it's accurate in comparison with kernel_DOS, which would be its predecessor if we had ever attempted to support it -- the executable is still NTKRNL*.exe or NTOSKRNL.exe after all, right? Recall this isn't the ARCH, which can still be either x86 or amd64 (ie x86_64). The win32 flag I was proposing here was relating to the UI toolkit, which is likely (i'm guessing) called win32 for legacy reasons rather than explicitly being 32bit, given I expect the 64bit toolkit has more or less the same API -- again, not 32bit-windows vs 64-bit-windows related. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iF4EAREIAAYFAlcXzvUACgkQAJxUfCtlWe2ezQEAyWMp3J7msrHqQbqZH/Ww1bXe pXY0rkEcC0nW7nq6TiUA/Ry56nWOGVobygHia+4bP7b9fomnPha39GdLLZyvafS5 =SEOj -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
