On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 01:05:53AM -0400, Robert J. Hansen wrote: > On 3/14/2012 12:44 AM, brian m. carlson wrote: > > From looking at the source, I don't believe so. Note that the only case > > in which you have more than one option is Windows/DOS. > > GnuPG compiles just fine under the Intel C/C++ compilers, under the GNU > Compiler Collection, under Sun Studio, under AIX's own compiler and > under Clang. Probably more, too, but these are the only ones I've > checked. (What's the standard compiler for OpenVMS?) > > There are a *ton* of options for how to compile GnuPG on non-Windows > platforms. Windows is one of the more limited platforms, since you're > more or less limited to MinGW-GCC or Cygwin-GCC. The last time I used > MS Visual C++ to try to compile GnuPG, the results were pretty awful...
I presumed from the original post that what the poster was looking for was Cygwin v. Mingw32, since he found the Version string in ASCII armor acceptable but not the --version output and they differ only in this aspect. Obviously there are many different ways one can compile a piece of software, but GnuPG has never exposed that information at all. In general, determining the build environment given only the executable is difficult and embedding that information requires a lot of work for little gain. Most people don't need that information because they know which compiler and options they (or their distributor) used. -- brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US +1 832 623 2791 | http://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b: 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users