[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Mingw-w64] RFC: MinGW-w64 toolchain (adoption and new packages)

(For anyone else following, see the other subthread too.)

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 05:22:41PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > Building the packages is slightly involved:
> > 1. Build binutils-mingw-w64 and install it.
> So the first step could be to get this package alone in Debian.

Indeed, although the bootstrap gcc package could be uploaded

> > binutils has manpage errors and spelling errors in its binaries, none of
> > which I thought really warranted fixing (especially since they're all in
> > binutils-source anyway).
> Please feel free to file a bug, especially if you have time to write a
> patch.

I did intend to, I'm checking which errors are still present in the
experimental binutils source.

> > * copyright-refers-to-symlink-license: this is part of debian/copyright which
> >   is reproduced from gcc-4.5-source's, and justified IMO; the
> >   version-specific licence symlink follows it immediately;
> Perhaps this is worth a bug on the lintian package?

Yup, I'll file one...

> > mingw-w64 has a ton of warnings, all instances of non-standard-dir-in-usr or
> > file-in-unusual-dir because it ships its headers and libraries
> > in /usr/$target/{include,lib}.
> Sounds like a lintian bug.

Probably not, since the directories aren't FHS-compliant. As far as
I'm aware though there isn't an agreed-upon FHS-compliant directory
structure for cross-compilers; you'd know more about that than me,
given your existing involvement with the toolchain!



Reply to: