Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Cygwin and MinGW [or rather, mingw-w64] are really different things with very different use cases. You should use Cygwin when you have POSIX code that you want to compile unmodified on Windows.

You should use mingw-w64 when you can modify your sources (eg. with lots of #ifdef WIN32) to call Win32 APIs, OR if you are using a framework like glib2 which handles those differences for you.



So what do you do if you want to run Linux code on Windows, but you can't use the GPL? Cygwin (was/is) not an option in that case, so you just use MinGW. It's a pain, but it gets the job done.


Not exactly sure what your point is. Cygwin is now LGPL, and the mingw-w64 libraries are all under their own free licenses which are (almost) all compatible with linking to proprietary programs.

In Fedora we have both Cygwin and the Fedora cross-compiler project which packages mingw-w64 compiler and many many precompiled libraries. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW


Not exactly sure what your point is. Cygwin is now LGPL

My point was to hypothesize why Cygwin became openGPL. I stated some of the advantages of mingw, and why those might motivate Cygwin to change their licensing.


What is "openGPL"? There is no such license. Cygwin is now under the GNU LGPL.


It's what I type when I'm not thinking very clearly.

Do you have an actual point, or are you just going to continue harassing me over irrelevant things?


>You should use mingw-w64 when you can modify your sources (eg. with lots of #ifdef WIN32)

If you're doing that, what's the difference between MinGW and compiling for native Windows?


MinGW is compiling for native Windows. It doesn't pretend to be compiling for Linux or any other Unix.


You can cross-compile from Linux.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: