mingw-users

[Mingw-users] Speculation on the name "mingw"

[Chris T. <tel...@mi...>]

Now I don't want to ruffle any feathers.  Lets just pretend
a new name was desired.

What would be appropriate alternative names for the native
gcc, tools, and w32api libraries which we now refer to as
"mingw"?

Or, is can anyone think of a redefiniton for what the letters
in "ming" or "mingw" stand for?

Re: [Mingw-users] Speculation on the name "mingw"

[Greg C. <chi...@mi...>]

Chris Telting wrote:
> 
> Now I don't want to ruffle any feathers.  Lets just pretend
> a new name was desired.

Would you be willing to have all responses sent to your
personal email only, and then to summarize in one message
for the list?

RE: [Mingw-users] Speculation on the name "mingw"

[Chris T. <tel...@mi...>]

Sure though I doubt I'll get but a couple responces.  Last time
I brought it up no one really cared.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: min...@li...
> [mailto:min...@li...]On Behalf Of Greg
> Chicares
> Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2000 8:03 AM
> To: min...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Mingw-users] Speculation on the name "mingw"
> 
> 
> Chris Telting wrote:
> > 
> > Now I don't want to ruffle any feathers.  Lets just pretend
> > a new name was desired.
> 
> Would you be willing to have all responses sent to your
> personal email only, and then to summarize in one message
> for the list?
> _______________________________________________
> MinGW-users mailing list
> Min...@li...
> 
> You may change your MinGW Account Options at:
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/mingw-users

Re[2]: [Mingw-users] Speculation on the name "mingw"

[Paul S. <pa...@is...>]

Hello Chris,

Chris Telting <tel...@mi...> wrote:

CT> Sure though I doubt I'll get but a couple responces.  Last time
CT> I brought it up no one really cared.

    Well, but did you yourself read others' messages on this topic?
For example, did you read my forward from libtool mailing list about
whole "gnu-win32" issue? It mentioned one and only feasible reason for
changing - not 'Mingw' name, it's decoding - disauthorizition of using
'GNU' as part of the name by FSF. Nothing like that takes place. So
there's no reason to change name.

    But there're always a lot of reasons to keep it - one is that
purpose of name is to denote specific notion, and when name is
changed, this reference is broken, what contradicts the purpose of the
name. Second, that's author who named it so, so not you or me to
change it. We'd rather be sure that author had an idea when named it.
And I belive that Colin Peters chose name right. Do you?



--
Paul Sokolovsky, IT Specialist
http://www.brainbench.com/transcript.jsp?pid=11135

Re: [Mingw-users] Speculation on the name "mingw"

[Jeff S. <jef...@ap...>]

Chris Telting wrote:
> Now I don't want to ruffle any feathers.  Lets just pretend
> a new name was desired.
> 
> What would be appropriate alternative names for the native
> gcc, tools, and w32api libraries which we now refer to as
> "mingw"?

How about simply GCC on Win32?

I never really understood what is special about this platform.  To me,
Mingw is a port of GCC and related tools to Win32, no more, no less. 
When GCC was ported to e.g. Solaris or AIX nobody assigned any special
name that I am aware of.

Mingw includes header files and stub libraries for Win32.  This was the
minimum necessary to make GCC usable since Microsoft does not provide
platform headers and libraries under redistributable terms, as I
understand it.  Mingw isn't alone, there are other platforms that don't
have a usable as/ld/libc that use equivalent tools from GNU.  (Mingw is
unusual perhaps in that it includes components that are not covered by
the GPL.)  The rest of the package consists of simple ports of GNU
tools.

I use Mingw because it allows me to use our favorite compiler when we
target Win32, and the same cross-hosted build environment for Solaris,
Linux and Win32.  I realize there are others who may only want a
first-rate compiler system for Win32, and don't necessarily care about
portability, free software, or other goals of the GNU system.

That said, the name "Mingw" is useful since a platform designation like
i386-pc-win32 probably isn't feasible; there are too many such variants,
e.g. Cygwin.  Mingw needs a triple that distinguishes it from the
others, and i386-pc-mingw seems just fine to me.

Jeff

Re: [Mingw-users] Speculation on the name "mingw"

[Bruce D. <bru...@bi...>]

Isn't it really just gcc for the win32 host with native runtime?  Whereas
cygwin is gcc for the win32 host with cygwin runtime?  Playing devil's
advocate, why does mingw have a name at all?

Bruce

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Telting" <tel...@mi...>
To: "Mingw32 Mailing List" <min...@li...>
Sent: September 24, 2000 9:49 AM
Subject: [Mingw-users] Speculation on the name "mingw"


> Now I don't want to ruffle any feathers.  Lets just pretend
> a new name was desired.
>
> What would be appropriate alternative names for the native
> gcc, tools, and w32api libraries which we now refer to as
> "mingw"?
>
> Or, is can anyone think of a redefiniton for what the letters
> in "ming" or "mingw" stand for?
> _______________________________________________
> MinGW-users mailing list
> Min...@li...
>
> You may change your MinGW Account Options at:
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/mingw-users
>