Re: 64-bit experiment

>From: Keith Marshall <[email protected]>


>On 07/04/17 14:52, Earnie wrote:
>> On 4/2/2017 3:47 PM, Cesar Strauss wrote:
>>> Following a recent thread on building a MinGW.org cross-compiler
>>> from scratch, I became curious about seeing how far I could get by
>>> targeting "x86_64-pc-mingw32" ...
... snip ...
>>> Otherwise, we can proceed by trial and error. In that case, we can
>>> take the opportunity to properly document the process for which we
>>> arrived at the final result. If this does not work, we can later
>>> reconsider looking at their startup code.
>>
>>> This may be the better choice.

>I agree; better to avoid the poisoned chalice.

>- --
>Regards,
>Keith.

I am in full agreement with Keith on this. Some years ago, I was
employed as IT support in a law office where I developed software to
automate the creation of the paperwork involved in filing lawsuits, i.e,
I was generating ingredients for poisoned chalices, and I know far
more than most people know about why they should be avoided.

As I have mentioned in previous messages to this list, I think
that the best long-term solution to navigating the Microsoft
legal minefield is to contact Microsoft and get a detailed answer as
what is permissible and what is not. The official Microsoft
philosophy about open-source software has improved
substantially in recent years, and it may even be possible
to get permission to access some license-protected
information that would otherwise be inaccessible.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot