[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Emacs 21.3.50 on cygwin bootstrap failed.
From: |
Harald Maier |
Subject: |
Re: Emacs 21.3.50 on cygwin bootstrap failed. |
Date: |
Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:05:29 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
Eric Hanchrow <address@hidden> writes:
> "Steven Wu" <address@hidden> writes:
> > I took the CVS src of Emacs 21.3.50 to cygwin and did make
> > bootstrap.
> ...
>
> "Harald Maier" <address@hidden> responds:
> I assume you need the mingw-make 3.79.1.
>
> I'd like to understand this better -- Harald says that one needs the
> MinGW version of `make' to build Emacs under Cygwin. But I am not
> sure that's completely correct. My understanding is that
>
> * the Emacs source tree is capable of building two *different* flavors
> of Emacs -- 1) the so-called "Win32" version (which does not require
> the Cygwin DLLs); and 2) the pure Cygwin version (which of course
> does require the Cygwin DLLs).
>
> * To build the Win32 version, you first cd to the `nt' directory. You
> then have a choice of software with which to do the build: 1)
> Microsoft Visual Studio 6; and 2) the MinGW versions of gcc, make,
> etc., *plus* `cp', `rm', and a few other Unix-style programs. In
> particular, using Cygwin make doesn't work, nor does using the
> Cygwin version of gcc.
>
> * To build the Cygwin version, you do not cd into `nt'; instead you
> simply do `configure && make bootstrap'. However, this always fails
> for me; I assume that the failures are simple mistakes in the Emacs
> source, which will get fixed eventually. I don't believe the
> failures are due to Emacs never having been ported to Cygwin;
> because some files refer to Cygwin (`configure.in', for example). I
> also assume that one does *not* use the MinGW tools when building
> the Cygwin version.
>
> So have I understood everything correctly?
>
> Implicit in my question is a criticism of the file nt/INSTALL; that
> file has cleared up my confusion, and seems out of date. I'd be
> delighted to update it if I only knew the facts.
I think you are right. From Steven's first statement it was not clear
to me that he wants to build a Cygwin Emacs. The second statement
clarified that.
Harald