From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" Date: 2006-10-28T06:43:00+09:00 Subject: Another nail in CygWin's coffin (attached) --------------070503060106080809020308 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Austin is basically right -- *nobody* should use CygWin as a Windows development platform/IDE/whatever. And nobody should use CygWin for Ruby or Rails work of any kind on a Windows platform, since everything you need is available in native form (the One-Click installer, Instant Rails, and a native Windows PostGreSQL). However, someone (Larry Wall??) flagged laziness as a virtue, so I'll ignore Austin's complaints about laziness and continue to use CygWin for times when someone gives me 15 minutes to get a job done on a Windows platform that would take me several hours or several days to do if I had to a. Locate a native Windows tool to do it, b. Install the Windows tool and c. Learn how to use the Windows tool. :) --------------070503060106080809020308 Content-Type: message/rfc822; name="Re: GCC 4.1.1?" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Re: GCC 4.1.1?" X-Account-Key: account2 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cesmail-net-znmeb@cesmail.net Received: (qmail 2435 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2006 01:21:22 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.1 (2006-03-10) on blade3.cesmail.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: hits=0.0 tests=none version=3.1.1 Received: from unknown (192.168.1.101) by blade3.cesmail.net with QMQP; 27 Oct 2006 01:21:22 -0000 Received: from sourceware.org (209.132.176.174) by mailgate.cesmail.net with SMTP; 27 Oct 2006 01:21:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 21891 invoked by alias); 27 Oct 2006 01:21:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 21883 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Oct 2006 01:21:03 -0000 Received: from smtp101.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com (HELO smtp101.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com) (68.142.198.200) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with SMTP; Fri, 27 Oct 2006 01:20:56 +0000 Received: (qmail 45029 invoked from network); 27 Oct 2006 01:20:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?68.122.9.103?) (timothyprince@sbcglobal.net@68.122.9.103 with plain) by smtp101.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com with SMTP; 27 Oct 2006 01:20:52 -0000 Message-ID: <45415EF3.6090709@sbcglobal.net> Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 18:20:51 -0700 From: Tim Prince Reply-To: tprince@myrealbox.com User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin@cygwin.com Subject: Re: GCC 4.1.1? References: <4540FD95.4030402@cesmail.net> In-Reply-To: <4540FD95.4030402@cesmail.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com X-SpamCop-Checked: 192.168.1.101 209.132.176.174 68.142.198.200 68.122.9.103 68.122.9.103 M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: > I'm sure this is a FAQ, but I didn't see it anywhere on line. How long > before GCC 4.1.1 is available in CygWin, and what can we users do to > accelerate the progress towards said availability? Why specifically 4.1.1? 4.2.0 has a lot of advantages. Not many people are testing newer gcc versions under cygwin and posting results to gcc_testresults@gcc.gnu.org. Far from sufficient interest to make cygwin one of the primary supported targets for gcc. People probably want to be assured that cygwin-specific bugs have been fixed, and see satisfactory results for cygwin modifications of standard gcc, such as -mno-cygwin support et al. If you don't need those modifications, you are weloome to build (if necessary) and install the newer public versions. I myself don't see a lot of incentive to keep cygwin up to date until 64-bit support is available. -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ --------------070503060106080809020308--