Re: Name for new port WAS: new port
On Wed, 22 Aug 2001, Sux0r Dani San wrote:
<snip>
> At 13:44 +0200 8/21/01, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> >On Tue, 21 Aug 2001, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> >
> >> Previously A Mennucc1 wrote:
> >> > the proposed name is 'Debian GNU/win'
> >>
> >> At the very least that should be win32.
> >
> >While thinking about it: since The Hurd is called hurd-i386 in the
> >archive, the archive name for cygwin should probably be win32-i386. We
> >should probably change all other archs to linux-arch too, don't we?
> >
>
> >My suggestion is cygwin-ia32
I never wrote that.
> Well, there is the fact that is possible in the future to exist a cygwin
devel environment for the upcoming Ms Windows for IA64.
Which probably will not be binary compatible for Windows/i386
If it gets out, and we want to support it, we'll probably have to
recompile anyway.
> Also, there exists the possibility of cygwin being ported to any of the
> other platforms NT exists on (ppc, mips, alpha...),
Which are not binary compatible either.
> so Any reference to Intel, or 32 bits architecture would be incorrect.
It would be incorrect to *not* do so, since software for Cygwin on Windows
on ia32 doesn't run on Cygwin for Windows for anything else.
After all, Linux/i386 binaries don't run on -say- Linux/m68k either,
remember?
<snip>
One more thing: having to wrap your single-lined-paragraphs is
annoying. Please use a decent MUA.
--
wouter dot verhelst at advalvas dot be
"Human knowledge belongs to the world"
-- from the movie "Antitrust"
Reply to: