Re: Bug#648306: The mingw* mess in Debian
+++ Ron [2011-11-14 03:03 +1030]:
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 01:17:43AM +0100, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> > I thought it better to follow the MinGW-w64 project's recommendations,
> > including using their triplets.
> > I'll try a build with the old triplets to see how that goes, and to figure
> > out what kind of upgrade path we can provide...
> Cool. Despite my grumbling about how people who paid no attention to the
> history are busy reinventing pain that we were supposed to be long past,
> I am actually really grateful for all the work you've put in to sorting
> this out. :)
> If things are going to break, it would be really nice to get *everyone*
> with a stake in this to break it the same way and then promise not to
> break it again.
I know almost nothing about mingw* use and variants, but it does strike
me that it just another cross-compiler, and choices about package
names and triplets should be at least influenced by what we do for all
the other cross-toolchains, multiarch considerations and
This was discussed a long time ago on the debian-embedded list and
this page covers using dpkg-architecture and dpkg-cross to help with
cross-building debian-style for mingw32:
http://wiki.njh.eu/Cross_Compiling_for_Win32 (It predates multiarch
but the fundamentals are there).
Would it be useful for dpkg to know about w32-i386 and thus to be able
to use all the dpkg-cross and/or multi-arch machinery to help when
crossbuilding for win32? If so then is there anything in what you are
doing that gets in the way of this?
Feel free to ignore me if this is just crazy-talk, but I thought this
should at least be mentionned in case it had not been considered, as
now seems like a good time to line up the necessary triplet-names,
arch names, multiarch paths etc.
I'm happy to discuss this further if anyone cares.
Principal hats: Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM