On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 1:37 AM, Ozkan Sezer <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Ruben Van Boxem
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I have come to the conclusion that my MinGW-w64 builds bring too little to
>> the table for me to continue maintaining them.
>>
>> I strongly encourage you to use the plethora of toolchains in a multitude of
>> configurations available at mingw-builds. Comparing download numbers they
>> have a much higher visibility, and e.g. their adoption by the Qt Project
>> speaks of their quality. They have succeeded in doing what I missed when I
>> decided to start building GCC, so my effort spent in doing that is now
>> wasted.
>
> That's sad. I was using your builds from time to time, too.

You used to distribute your own builds, too :)

> Perhaps you can document your build process in the project
> resources, e.g. place your scripts in the svn somewhere or
> something?

svn/experimental/buildsystem is a perfect place to upload scripts.


>>
>> I may dabble into getting Clang 3.3 to work on Windows, perhaps even with
>> libc++, but I am not promising anything.
>>
>> I'll still linger around here though, don't worry.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Ruben
>
> --
> O.S.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:
>
> Build for Windows Store.
>
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Mingw-w64-public mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows:

Build for Windows Store.

http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Mingw-w64-public mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public

Reply via email to