From: Paul S. <pa...@is...> - 2000-09-12 18:34:39
|
Hello Tor, Tor Lillqvist <tm...@ik...> wrote: >> But since it's GNU target TL> Umm, please explain more in detail in which way mingw32 is a GNU TL> target. For informal answer, ask Colin Peters or Mumit Khan - they chose name Minimalist GNU-Win32. For me, it's enough that there's official GNU architecture tripple for it, i386-unknown-mingw32, and very software which is heart of mingw32 distribution built using --host=mingw32 --target=mingw32 . TL> Isn't mingw more a build environment, and not a target? The TL> target is native Win32, with msvcrt (or crtdll) Microsoft C TL> runtime. The little mingw runtime library there is is explicitly not TL> Open Source (GPL, LGPL or otherwise), but in the public domain. Please do not pick on words, or rather letters, or rather their case. Also, to be picking from my side, I have a feeling that you confuse w32api library, part of minfw32, with mingw32 at whole. But my intention not to start a flame, but rather to convey my opinion that this maillist's topic wider than discussing "little mingw runtime library" and even wider than "Windows here not Windows 'unix clone"". I dislike separatism dendencies, especially when there's hardly something to divide. I hope you all read essays on open source community (well, on people who use software products, at least some of which distributed with source available), it is often compared with guys kicking each other. In application to GNU/Win32 (note - when you use mingw32, you use *GNU* C and C++ compiler), there were single maillist where all could be talked about, and full-blown mingw32 started there, too. Since cygwin people said 'out' to discussions not directly related to cygwin (and they had reason - there huge traffic), this list is only bulwark of free GNU/Win32 thought. And we should not push each other aside. TL> --tml -- Paul Sokolovsky, IT Specialist http://www.brainbench.com/transcript.jsp?pid=11135 |