This is the mail archive of the cygwin-developers mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 6/27/2011 20:00, Ryan Johnson wrote: > On 26/06/2011 8:52 PM, JonY wrote: >> On 6/27/2011 01:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >>> Right, but that wasn't what I meant. Sorry for being unclear. I was >>> talking about the name of the Cygwin DLL. For instance, if we decide >>> that it must reside in the /bin directory, it must have a different name >>> than the 32 bit dll, for instance, cygwin64-1.dll. If we decide that >>> all 64 bit applications and DLLs reside in a parallel directory, it >>> could have the same name, for instance, /bin64/cygwin1.dll. >>> >>> But let's not go into too much detail yet. >>> >> I was thinking that we have them totally separated, so we don't need to >> deal with DLL name clashes. Eg C:\Cygwin for 32bit and C:\Cygwin64 for >> 64bit. No need to invent bin32 or bin64. > ++ > > We'll probably have to tweak %PATH% per-app, though -- 64-bit apps would > need the Cygwin64 first and Cygwin second, with that reversed for 32-bit > apps. > How does that happen for per-app? >>>>> - Create a x86_64-pc-cygwin cross toolchain. >>>> Yeah, I suppose newlib has to be ported first. >>> Right, I forgot about that one. But newlib works rather well for many >>> systems, so that shouldn't be much of a problem. >>> >> There's that hairy LP64 vs LLP64 issue, personally, I'd prefer the LLP64 >> route since Cygwin is a translation layer and will need to communicate >> with Windows at the backend, but I suspect many more will want the LP64 >> route for Posix software compatibility. >> >> I suppose there could be a minimalist Cygwin fork of the win32api to >> make it LP64 compatible. Maybe a thunk/translator layer will be easier. > I suspect we'll come out ahead in the end by following Linux and doing > the translator -- the number of native windows apps compiled with > cygwin-gcc (and which can't use mingw-gcc) seems a rather small fraction > of the total, and posix apps could become a royal pain to compile on > cygwin if sizeof(long) != sizeof(void*). > > So, some sort of thunk server/client thing in between the Cygwin DLL and system DLL?
Attachment:
0xED74C077.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |