| 1 |
Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>On Thursday 13 October 2005 12:25 pm, Stefan Jones wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
>>dev-util/xmingw-binutils dev-util/xmingw-runtime |
| 7 |
>>dev-util/xmingw-gcc dev-util/xmingw-w32api |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
>i'd prefer to see these moved into the normal binutils/gcc ebuilds myself |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
I do not think that would ever work well; the bootstrap method is a bit |
| 16 |
to out of sync with the GNU/Linux target |
| 17 |
Plus it would mean I would step on the gcc maintainers toes alot. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
[ xmingw cross compiled libraries] |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
>are these libraries special ? that is, are these things specific to xmingw ? |
| 22 |
>or are they just ebuilds which take normal packages and force them to be |
| 23 |
>compiled with the xmingw toolchain ? |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
About half (guess) are xmingw spercific; will not compile in GNU/Linux. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Others are normal libraries which work on Linux but need special tricks |
| 30 |
to get working with the crosscompiler. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
>if they are xmingw-specific, then they should be added to the tree as sep |
| 33 |
>packages, but if they are normal packages and these ebuilds are special hacks |
| 34 |
>to cross compile them with xmingw, then they have no business in the tree |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
But what is the difference in effect? Both are libraries for the xmingw |
| 38 |
toolchain, but a line would need to be drawn otherwise I might as well |
| 39 |
port the entire cygwin distribution! |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Out of tree collection looks good; but I doubt anyone will find it and I |
| 42 |
do not really use xmingw! |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
Stefan |
| 45 |
-- |
| 46 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives