| 1 |
Hey Martin, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On 18-01-2021 06:04:45 +0100, Martin Oberzalek wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Hello Fabian, |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> > So, the inevitable question: who needs x64-cygwin/x86-winnt, and who |
| 8 |
> > would take care of maintaining it? If noone steps up (I cannot even run |
| 9 |
> > the platform) before Feb 1st 2021, I'll probably continue and drop these |
| 10 |
> > two from Gentoo at some point after that. |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > Please chime in if you have an opinion, info, interest, etc. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> we are using a fork from haubi from last year und using |
| 15 |
> * x64-cygwin |
| 16 |
> * x86-winnt |
| 17 |
> * x64-winnt |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> x86-winnt is not so important for us. In fact, maybe we will also switch to WSL for our use case in future... |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Ok, I thought *-winnt targets were native Windows code, apparently WSL |
| 22 |
is too? (I'm just learning here, I guess.) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> But now we are using actual cygwin versions and our fork of gentoo. Currently this is only working |
| 25 |
> with the developer release of the cygwin.dll. What I can do is: testing the gentoo prefix stack with |
| 26 |
> this upcomming new cygwin release (when its released) and give some feedback. If I can get it working I would update |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Prefix/Cygwin |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
I'm trying to understand what this means. I'm sure/certain the current |
| 31 |
tree doesn't work for Cygwin. This means I anticipate you'll have to |
| 32 |
patch/fix a lot of packages for it. Would it be more useful to use an |
| 33 |
overlay for Cygwin instead? |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Thanks, |
| 36 |
Fabian |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
Fabian Groffen |
| 40 |
Gentoo on a different level |
Archives