Ray Hurst wrote: > Ooops. A chicken and egg story. > You're right. I'm using cygwin for windows XP and I assume gcc is using > libc to build with. Running configure on glib-2.5 results in a not > supported error. No. Cygwin does not use glibc at all, and glibc only works with Linux (and the HURD.) Cygwin provides its own libc implementation, based on newlib for much of the stdio, string, and math parts. Note that "libc" is a generic term, so saying "I assume gcc is using libc" is meaningless; libc is the C library by definition, so gcc is always using *some* libc. Brian
