Re: FW: [Mingw-msys] How do I recreate the MSYS distribution?
- Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:45:45 -0400
- From: "Brandon Van Every" <bvanevery@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [Mingw-msys] Default install location for CMake
On 10/24/07, Keith Marshall <keithmarshall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 14:55 -0400, Brandon Van Every wrote:
> > Native Windows developers don't do that. Everything for a given app
> > belongs under 1 directory.
> And each lives in splendid isolation, with no knowledge of other
> installed apps, little if any co-operation between any two, and an
> almighty mess of an overlong $PATH, to make it all hang together.
That's Windows native development though. It is untrusting and
paranoid. It is not for programmers, it is for end users.
There aren't stacks of trusted open source libraries to draw upon.
There's no canonical configuration, so no testing for such a
So what I'm getting at, is when you guys say MSYS is for Windows
native development, do you really mean it? Or are you really saying,
"We like everything to be Unix, but we don't like the bloat of Cygwin"
> ...this sort of PATH proliferation. I'm not saying either approach is
> right or wrong; they are simply different development models. MinGW is
> "Minimalist GNU for Windows"; as such, it follows the Unixy GNU model,
MinGW is a compiler. When I run mingw32-make from a Windows Command
Prompt, I could care less about GNU anything.
> > and the latter is canonical native Windows development, doesn't
> > pollute anything.
> But it does lead to PATH proliferation, which I intensely dislike.
Who cares? Well, you care, but why should the native Windows
development world care what you don't like? I can think of all sorts
of things in programming I don't like, many of them coming from
Microsoft. I have the power to change lots of them in my own
projects. But there are still dominant standards which people use by
default. Windows native developers aren't concerned with path
proliferation. It's standard drill.
> I can't speak for the others, but my primary development platform is
> GNU/Linux; I have absolutely no interest in developing exclusively for
> Woe32. I use MinGW and MSYS as a vehicle for porting Unixy tools to
> Woe32; if my employer didn't shortsightedly force me to use Woe32, I
> wouldn't bother, for I use these Unixy tools almost exclusively, to
> fulfil my job function.
Right. You see MSYS as a Windows avoidance solution. I don't think
that's the basis upon which we should be deciding the defaults, unless
almost every MSYS user out there is typically a Windows avoider. If
that's the case, then let's admit that MSYS really isn't about Windows
native development. It just doesn't want to be bloated like Cygwin.
My own biases: I'm an indie game developer. Realistically, Linux is
moribund as a consumer desktop market. There's the Mac, but that
platform doesn't have anywhere near the volume of the Windows PC.
Consoles are expensive to develop for and have licensing restrictions.
The Windows PC is pretty much the best platform for an indie game
developer, whether I like it or not. I see MinGW as a free
alternative to MSVC. Cygwin isn't an alternative, I'm not shipping
GPLed code and -mno_cygwin is unreliable in practice.
Brandon Van Every
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
Mingw-msys mailing list