On Mar 9 07:02, Tony Mechelynck wrote: > On 08/03/09 10:53, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > The -mno-cygwin option was always just a hack. You could have put this > > hack into the Linux i686 compiler as well, but why would you? Same for > > Cygwin. The -mno-cygwin option will be removed. To build a Mingw > > binary, which is logically a cross-build, you will need a > > cross-compiler. With the move to the new Cygwin 1.7 release and the > > move to the latest gcc-4.x release, the -mno-cygwin option will be > > replaced by a mingw cross-compiler which will become part of the distro. > > > > Does that make sense? > > > > > > Corinna > > > > Yes, it does. Then IIUC the Make_cyg.mak can remain, with a different > compiler name (which is already a variable anyway IIUC), possibly a > different linker name (since we will need to use a cross-linker IIUC) > removing the -mno-cygwin argument to the compiler and the -mwindows > argument to the linker, and no other changes than these (which are > rather minor) IIUC.
Looks like YUC. Make_cyg.mak appears to use $(CC) throughout for compile and link stage anyway. So it should be sufficient (grain/salt) to call CC=i686-pc-mingw32-gcc make -f Make_cyg.mak after the -mno-cygwin option has been removed. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Cygwin Project Co-Leader Red Hat --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
