Re: Building Win32 apps on Linux? (To Cygwin users on the list...)

[Brian Dessent <brian at dessent dot net>]

Toralf Lund wrote:

> I guess I've just bought Red Hat's story on this, i.e. (from
> http://www.redhat.com/software/cygwin/):
> 
>         Why Use Cygwin?
> 
>     One of the largest problems developers face today is supporting
>     their applications on disparate platforms. Windows workstations
>     continue to be added to an environment already populated by Linux
>     and other UNIX-based Operating Systems. Using Cygwin, developers can
>     manage heterogeneous environments in a consistent, efficient way.
>     Cygwin brings a standard UNIX/Linux shell environment, including
>     many of its most useful commands to the Windows platform, so IT
>     managers can effectively deploy trained staff, and leverage existing
>     investments in UNIX/Linux source code and shell scripts.
> 
> But if you say that Cygwin isn't commonly used like that, I guess I'll
> have to take your word for it, since I don't really know a lot about the
> product or its user base.

Redhat's specific pitch is about using Cygwin in a software development
setting, but that is just one angle.  You have to realize that Redhat
actually has little to nothing do with Cygwin these days, other than
owning the copyrights.  Cygwin is not a product, it is a 100% volunteer
project.  It gets used by many people for many reasons, but the only
ones Redhat are going to really care about are those that they can use
to sell commercial licenses.  Besides, Redhat will gladly sell you a
crosscompiler toolchain, if that's what you want.  If you're talking
about commercial products, then sure.

I'm not saying that Cygwin isn't used a lot by software developers in
mixed environments, because it is.  I'm saying that, based on my
observations, most people that are using Cygwin are doing so because the
immediate computer they have available to them must run windows for one
reason or another, but they would rather have a *nix-style environment.

> Yes. But apparently, it's being built on a Linux host...

That is one developer's preference.  I don't see how it has anything to
do with the scope and vision of the project, which does not include
supporting linux binaries.

By this line of reasoning, volunteer-run linux distros like Fedora and
Debian should ship win32-hosted linux-targeted binaries of gcc, since
hey, some linux users might have windows systems too.  How do you think
the fedora packagers would react if you told them they should support
windows binaries in their distro?  Do you think they would have any
desire to do so?  Would their package system even have the machinery to
support foreign binaries?

Brian

------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com