On 6/20/2015 9:38 PM, John E. / TDM wrote: > On 6/20/2015 7:30 PM, Edward Diener wrote: >> But you are creating a product for Windows in which the entire product, >> including the gcc compiler, standard C library, standard C++ library, >> and whatever other tools are entailed in a mingw-64 release, are all >> part of any mingw-64 distribution. That I appreciate, and it is done >> much better than mingw ever did it. >> >> Why not then set the paths to your include files and libraries to >> relative places within the distribution ? > > As a side note, the TDM-GCC[1] toolchains all include a patch to > effectively make all paths relative. Unfortunately this greatly > complicates the process of building GCC itself, which may be part of the > reason why it's not been standardized yet.
The limitation of gcc's hardcoded absolute paths should never have been propagated to mingw-64 ( or mingw originally ). I can understand it makes building gcc for Windows more difficult to have paths relative to the installation but hardcoded absolute paths are really an archaism that the computer programming world needs to eliminate if there is no good reason for it and it is merely being propagated by rote. Thanks ! I will look at your toolchains. I assume if all paths are relative there is no need for any installation to go into or have a symbolic link from c:\mingw. Any timeframe for a gcc 5.1 release ? I noticed the latest mingw-64 install now has gcc-5.1, but it has the same hardcoded to c:\mingw limitation which my OP is about. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Mingw-w64-public mailing list Mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
