On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 00:23:03 +0100 Christian Weisgerber <na...@mips.inka.de> wrote:
> Even more so than the micro-controller toolchains that I already > touched, this port feels massively outdated and should probably be > replaced by some newer version. That, however, is a substantial > undertaking and needs to be done by somebody who can verify that > the result actually works. > > So here are the fixes required to build this with -fno-common, > straight from the GNU binutils history. (So easy to find with > tog after cloning a local copy of the Git repo... I digress.) > > Do we want this? Should the port be deleted instead? Unless someone updates this, ok gkoehler@ to delete the port. This port combines gcc 3.4.5 from 2005 with a mingw runtime from 2009 or 2010 to target Microsoft Windows. I never used this port. I did use MinGW, with a newer gcc, running on Windows itself, around 2014. Today, I don't use mingw. http://mingw-w64.org/doku.php is a fork of the runtime that targets both amd64 and i386. (The runtime provides header files and such for linking to Windows system libraries. You would use the runtime with the mingw targets of GNU binutils and gcc.) https://osdn.net/projects/mingw/ is the original MinGW, has the runtime for only i386. Years ago, they merged their runtime from 2 packages (mingwrt, w32api) into 1 (wsl). If I would use MinGW today, I would not cross-compile from OpenBSD. I would first try MSYS2 https://www.msys2.org/ on Windows itself. MSYS2 uses mingw-w64 and provides bash with gcc (or clang). If I would cross-compile from OpenBSD, I would first try to use lld and clang with the mingw-w64 runtime. If it would work, I would have skipped compiling gcc and binutils. I would ignore this old port with its obsolete gcc. --George
