> Message #14 received at 602...@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox): > From: Matthias Klose <d...@debian.org> > To: Stephen Kitt <st...@sk2.org>, 602...@bugs.debian.org > Subject: Re: Bug#602997: ITP: gcc-mingw-w64 -- The GNU Compiler Collection > for MinGW-w64 > Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2010 21:13:58 +0100 > > On 10.11.2010 08:32, Stephen Kitt wrote: >> Package: wnpp >> Severity: wishlist >> Owner: Stephen Kitt<st...@sk2.org> >> >> >> * Package name : gcc-mingw-w64 > > we already have a mingw32 toolchain. Is it possible to build a mingw biarch > toolchain instead of a new package? >
The current mingw32 toolchain uses "mingw.org" runtime. Mingw-w64 project provides a different runtime - w64. This runtime supports win32, win64 and wince. Win32 & Win64 runtimes can be build as biarch. Fedora and openSUSE are using the mingw-w64 runtimes for both x86 and amd64 cross-toolchains to windows. For more info on mingw-64 project and many users see their homepage: http://mingw-w64.sourceforge.net/ > the toolchain currently builds for arch `any'. Is this really necessary? > Maybe > it's fine to to prove that this is buildable on arm or mips, but is it really > us > ed? I personally am only aware of people using it on x86, amd64 on *nix & windows. >> we already have a mingw32 toolchain. Is it possible to build a mingw >> biarch toolchain instead of a new package? > > MinGW32 and MinGW-w64 are actually two different toolchains, not > simply bi-arch variants of the same toolchain; they have different > triplets. (In fact given the way ldscripts are shipped they would > probably have to conflict with each other.) MinGW-w64 provides both > 32-bit and 64-bit toolchains, and builds some 32-bit software (such as > Wine Gecko) which the current mingw32 toolchain can't - that is in > fact why Ove Kaaven was interested in Robert Millan's gcc-mingw32 > package and associated packages which were actually based on MinGW-w64 > rather than MinGW32, and why I started work on packaging the whole > toolchain. > Agree. The original mingw, is separate from the mingw-w64 project. Mingw-w64 is better on both x86 and amd64. > My aim with the mingw-w64 toolchain is two-fold: > > * provide a proper MinGW-w64 toolchain, handling the varied > requirements of the potential users in Debian, notably wine-gecko > and potentially wine-mono; > * avoid the confusion which exists regarding mingw32 and gcc-mingw32. > I would like to join maintainship with additional goal: * provide cross-compiled -dev packages, such that debian users can easily cross-compile their apps to win32 and win64 using mingw-w64 based toolchains. > I'm currently discussing the situation with Ron, the maintainer of the > mingw32 toolchain. Our intention is ideally to establish whether one > of the two toolchains can handle the various requirements, in which > case only that one would be kept. > I haven't been in touch with Ron. > Note that for now MinGW (the new name for MinGW32) doesn't support > 64-bit targets; that support is supposed to be forthcoming. A bigger > problem is that recent releases of MinGW only support Windows-hosted > compilers, as I understand things at least. > >> the toolchain currently builds for arch `any'. Is this really >> necessary? Maybe it's fine to to prove that this is buildable on >> arm or mips, but is it really used? > > Probably not, i386 and amd64 would be perfectly sufficient. > > Thanks for your interest, > > Stephen Dear Stephen, Ron and everyone else. I have started my own packaging of mingw-w64 based toolchains myself a while ago. Packaging is available here: https://code.launchpad.net/~mingw-w64/mingw-w64/gcc-4.4 Some description: 1) One source package to bootstrap both x86 and amd64 cross-toolchains using runtimes by mingw-w64 project. 2) Each time build is not using pre-compiled binaries (i.e. there is no bootstrap package) 3) By default binutils-source and gcc-source are used. 4) Alternatively upstream checkouts can be used. 5) There is a daily build ppa using: binutils trunk, gcc-4.4 branch, mingw-w64 trunk. https://code.launchpad.net/~mingw-w64/+recipe/gcc4.4+trunk (I will start doing 4.5 & 4.6 based builds soon) 6) It is two toolchains, not a bi-arch. I haven't tried building bi-arch and amd64 doesn't support java, where x86 does. And I use slightly different options for two of them. 7) It also includes pthread-win32 dll build from source with patches to make it build amd64 variant as well. 8) The "build" machinery is not the one used in native debian-gcc or binutils. I do not know if that is desired from debian-toolchain devs. (I haven't found an easy way to plug in a two step mingw-w64 compilation into debian-gcc build rules) I will look over current packaging done by Stephen. Hopefully we can reconcile and work together on them. What sort of criteria should we have for future mingw toolchains in Debian? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
