ismail: I do not find the mingw.org distribution useful anymore compared with the mingw-w64 based ones.
OTOH supporting mingw,org seems trivial, few code lines in MinGW::MinGW and in MinGW::AddClangCXXStdlibIncludeArgs to get the right directories and commenting out the -lpthread you mentioned. mingw.org is still quite popular, see the number of download for the installers http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw/files/Installer/mingw-get/mingw-get-0.6.2-beta-20131004-1/ (ignore the other numbers, they are inflated since the installer download them). I don't have a strong opinion. We can decide that clang does not support mingw.org and or go on with the minimal code support required. 2015-06-30 15:52 GMT+03:00 İsmail Dönmez <[email protected]>: > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Yaron Keren <[email protected]> > wrote: > > OK, here is an updated patch for ToT. > > > > So no more hardcoded paths: all directories are based on gcc location, > which must be on the PATH. This enables having several mingw distributions > installed and switching between them by simply changing the PATH pointing > to gcc.exe. > > > > This patch was tested on Windows 7, with mingw-w64 {32,64} bits and the > older mingw.org 32 bits. > > It was not tested on Linux cross-compilation to Windows. It may still > work since all paths are gcc relative. > > Would it make sense to drop mingw.org support? I see you even comment > out pthread support due to mingw.org not supporting it. Going forward > supporting mingw-w64 would be easier to maintain and better too. >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
