MSYS2-installation.md wrong sentence
pedrolcl opened this issue · 10 comments
wiki/MSYS2-installation.md says:
Note: if you are using 64-bit Windows, there is no reason to use 32-bit MSYS2. Well, to be honest, there is one reason: you want to develop MSYS2 software (or contribute to MSYS2-packages) and want to test that the software/package also works on 32-bit MSYS2. When it comes to native software, 64-bit MSYS2 can be used to build, install and run both 32-bit and 64-bit variants. 64-bit MSYS2 software (practically speaking) never needs to be "re-based", giving a better user experience.
I find that sentence "64-bit MSYS2 can be used to build, install and run both 32-bit and 64-bit variants" wrong and/or misleading. Or at least it's not true anymore. Maybe I am missing something and there is a multilib toolchain in msys2?
You omitted the most important part of that sentence in your quote: "When it comes to native software".
The sentence is about developing/using native 32-bit or 64-bit Windows applications and/or libraries.
The 64-bit MSYS2 (approx. Cygwin) parts of the MSYS2 project can be used to do that. That is, e.g., the bash and other "low-level" things mostly needed for development.
MSYS2 software itself is not native Windows. But the MSYS2 project also hosts repositories with packages for native Windows.
See also here: https://www.msys2.org/docs/environments/
I think that 32 bit msys2 section should be removed. 32 bit msys2 installation was deprecated & removed long ago.
You omitted the most important part of that sentence in your quote: "When it comes to native software". The sentence is about developing/using native 32-bit or 64-bit Windows applications and/or libraries. The 64-bit MSYS2 (approx. Cygwin) parts of the MSYS2 project can be used to do that. That is, e.g., the bash and other "low-level" things mostly needed for development.
MSYS2 software itself is not native Windows. But the MSYS2 project also hosts repositories with packages for native Windows.
See also here: https://www.msys2.org/docs/environments/
Many/most people installs msys2 just to access and use gcc to build source code on windows. And the page is named "installation", so that people is likely to read this page, and feel betrayed.
Many/most people installs msys2 just to access and use gcc to build source code on windows. And the page is named "installation", so that people is likely to read this page, and feel betrayed.
Hu? Could you please elaborate on why they would feel betrayed?
Edit: There are gcc packages for various (native and "Cygwin") environments distributed by the MSY2 project:
https://packages.msys2.org/search?q=gcc
So, people installing MSYS2 to access and use gcc to build source code on Windows would get what they were looking for...
I really wish there were different names for the MSYS2 environment (that is a derivative of Cygwin) and the MSYS2 project as a whole that provides repositories with packages (including compilers) for the different environments. That would probably help to avoid some confusion...
I really wish there were different names for the MSYS2 environment (that is a derivative of Cygwin) and the MSYS2 project as a whole that provides repositories with packages (including compilers) for the different environments. That would probably help to avoid some confusion...
We could rename it to CYGWIN at some point. Not sure if that reduces or increases the confusion though.
Not sure if that reduces or increases the confusion though.
User would get confused and reports msys2 issues in cygwin or vice-versa.
We could rename it to CYGWIN at some point. Not sure if that reduces or increases the confusion though.
We should probably ask the Cygwin maintainers first if we converge on that.
If we'd like to point out that it is not exactly Cygwin, maybe we could name it somewhat differently. E.g., CYG64? That would maybe also allow to avoid confusion with the Cygwin project.
yeah, CYGWINISH ;)
We could also go a completely different route and name it something like CORE, BASE, INTERNAL, DEV etc.
Thinking about it, it might be good if the name of the environment would hint that it is a "(mainly) POSIX-compatible runtime environment that only happens to run on Windows". For people that are familiar with Cygwin, that name (or a similar one) would probably speak for itself. For others, that might be more difficult to convey in one single word.
I keep circling back to something like CYG64 (that would also hint at it being a 64-bit environment and might be different enough to avoid confusing it with the Cygwin project). Or POSIXW64?