[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       busybox
Subject:    Re: [PATCH 35/39] Makefile: support building on Windows using MinGW
From:       Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds () gmail ! com>
Date:       2010-04-18 10:29:06
Message-ID: i2kfcaeb9bf1004180329j8731309fg61620a1034fd623e () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 8:30 AM, Rob Landley <rob@landley.net> wrote:
> On Friday 16 April 2010 01:50:24 Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 2:16 AM, Dan Fandrich <dan@coneharvesters.com>
> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 10:02:20PM +0200, Nguyá »?n Thà ¡i Ngá »?c Duy wrote:
>> >> +ifeq ($(CONFIG_TARGET_WIN32),y)
>> >
>> > Many parts of this patch series depend on CONFIG_TARGET_WIN32. But it
>> > seems many instances are really specific to MingW32 rather than
>> > generically Win32. If someone later does a Cygwin port, or a MSVC port, I
>> > imagine much of what's conditionally compiled with CONFIG_TARGET_WIN32
>> > won't be relevant. Does it make sense to change this variable to
>> > CONFIG_TARGET_MINGW32 instead?
>>
>> As far as I know, there are three big compilers on Windows: MSVC,
>> MinGW and Cygwin.
>
> Tinycc has effectively turned into a windows-only compiler under the current
> maintainer.

Thanks. I'll check it out.
-- 
Duy
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
busybox@busybox.net
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]