On Thursday 13 October 2005 08:16 pm, Stefan Jones wrote: > Mike Frysinger wrote: > >On Thursday 13 October 2005 12:25 pm, Stefan Jones wrote: > >>dev-util/xmingw-binutils dev-util/xmingw-runtime > >>dev-util/xmingw-gcc dev-util/xmingw-w32api > > > >i'd prefer to see these moved into the normal binutils/gcc ebuilds myself > > I do not think that would ever work well; the bootstrap method is a bit > to out of sync with the GNU/Linux target
glanced in the ebuilds and they dont look too bad to me ... this is how we do avr after all ... we punted the avr gcc/binutils ebuilds and now people have to `emerge crossdev && crossdev avr` > Plus it would mean I would step on the gcc maintainers toes alot. err, you mean me ? :) i dont think the other toolchain guys would care too much > [ xmingw cross compiled libraries] > > >are these libraries special ? that is, are these things specific to > > xmingw ? or are they just ebuilds which take normal packages and force > > them to be compiled with the xmingw toolchain ? > > About half (guess) are xmingw spercific; will not compile in GNU/Linux. these are OK then imho > Others are normal libraries which work on Linux but need special tricks > to get working with the crosscompiler. these are not valid then as sep packages > >if they are xmingw-specific, then they should be added to the tree as sep > >packages, but if they are normal packages and these ebuilds are special > > hacks to cross compile them with xmingw, then they have no business in > > the tree > > But what is the difference in effect? Both are libraries for the xmingw > toolchain, but a line would need to be drawn otherwise I might as well > port the entire cygwin distribution! i thought the line i drew was pretty clear ;) -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
