From: Christopher F. <me...@cg...> - 2005-06-11 03:54:41
|
On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 08:03:53AM +1200, Danny Smith wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Aaron W. LaFramboise" >>So I think it is obvious that something of a separation of targets is >>needed. I'm proposing creating two separate targets that share common >>maintainers and a common codebase. > >Available resources for maintaining _one_ target in the GCC/binutils >core are precious. Diluting those resources is IMO not a good idea.. >I also think that it may confusion on GCC and binutils list -- will the >real mingw please stand up -- when submitting bug reports and patches. >It already happens now: some reviewers still get cygwin/mingw >distinctions muddled. Right. As the (reluctant) maintainer for the windows port of a few GNU packages, I don't think we need another target. Am I missing something here, though? Doesn't mingw already support some "POSIX" functionality via msvcrt? Doesn't it already provide some POSIX functions (getopt) in mingwex? Don't I see openddir and closedir implementations in mingwex, even if they are differently named? I guess I don't understand the big deal here. cgf |