Hi René, Sorry for not getting back to you sooner! On Wed, 5 Oct 2011 10:32:17 +0200, Rene Engelhard <rene@debian.org> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 01:10:29AM +0200, Rene Engelhard wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 12:10:13AM +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote: > > > mingw-w64, which is intended to eventually replace mingw32 and the > > > > Why is it then cllaed w*64*? And why didn't it replace them yet? > > Sound like either a broken package name or wishful thinking to me - > > or even both, > > That said, the "official" complete mingw cross-compilation Linux->Windows > attempt at http://tinderbox.libreoffice.org/MASTER/status.html uses > mingw-w64: > > [...] > --build=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu > --host=i686-w64-mingw32 > [...] > > Looks sane, then :) Thanks for taking the time to investigate! The naming is weird, see http://bugs.debian.org/622276 for the details. The new triplets in use are the reason why the package couldn't simply replace the mingw32 toolchain; the compilers aren't drop-in replacements, so if I had just declared a "Replaces" relation I would have caused a few FTBFSs. Given that I'm the one driving the change I prefer taking the time to get in touch with the various maintainers involved! > Changed it for non-squeeze-backports builds. Thanks! On Fri, 30 Sep 2011 02:06:44 +0200, Rene Engelhard <rene@debian.org> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 12:10:13AM +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote: > > mingw-w64, which is intended to eventually replace mingw32 and the > > assorted packages, is now available in Debian along with new builds of > ^^^ > > binutils and gcc. To build libreoffice using mingw-w64, all that's > > Do you want to say with that that I need >= 2.0? > > rene@frodo:~$ rmadison mingw-w64 > mingw-w64 | 0~20100125-3 | squeeze | source, all > mingw-w64 | 2.0~rc1-1 | wheezy | source, all > mingw-w64 | 2.0~rc1-1 | sid | source, all > > or is the 20100125 version also ok? > (Important for squeeze backports) You need at least version 1.0, which was previously in sid/wheezy; I suppose since no Debian release will ever have 1.0 you might as well specify >= 2.0~. The version in squeeze won't work, it uses yet another triplet and was only intended for Win64 programs. Best regards, Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature