Whoops! My reply didn't go to the list initially...
On 11/5/2014 11:04 AM, Ray Donnelly wrote:
>
> mingw-w64-{i686,x86_64}-toolchain wouldn't be appropriate
>
Agreed!
>
> ${MINGW_PACKAGE_PREFIX}-arm-linux-gnu-toolchain would be a good (if
> very long) package name, maybe we could shorten -toolchain to -tc (or
> -xtc if you really like cross to be in there somewhere?)
>
I'm building "arm-none-eabi" so I guess we could settle on
"${MINGW_PACKAGE_PREFIX}-arm-none-eabi-toolchain"? The abreviations are
not immediately clear and, to the casual user, I'd say clarity is important.
The names of the packages are currently
"${MINGW_PACKAGE_PREFIX}-{binutils,newlib,gcc}-arm-none-eabi". Is this
OK with you?
I'll do a pull request for binutils once we agree on package naming
convention and you can then tell me if you'd like something changed.
>
> I'm more interested in how you're planning to build them. I'm somewhat
> involved in crosstool-ng, and was planning to add a load of cross
> compilers to MSYS2/MinGW-w64 packages when MSYS2 itself is working
> well enough .. This would include cross compilers targeting Linux (arm
> and intel) and Darwin (arm and intel).
>
I thought about using crosstool-ng but in the end decided to go with
something that, for me, is simpler: have all the build logic in PKGBUILD.
Carlos
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Msys2-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/msys2-users
