Discuss: Base packages for Win32 / Win64 / OS X cross-compilation

Richard W.M. Jones rjones at redhat.com
Thu Feb 12 13:54:36 UTC 2009

On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 01:58:38PM +0100, Farkas Levente wrote:
> at the same time i'd name cross-headers on all platform (ie. rename
> mingw32-w32api to headers to use the same naming convention).

Yeah ... but ...

The name of mingw32-w32api has almost no impact on end users, since we
wouldn't expect them to install this package explicitly.

So we'd rename it, at a cost of a full review, hours of work at
minimum.  But to what purpose?

> another good question is the filesystem layout which probably should
> have to change.

Why?  The filesystem layout is defined in the approved packaging
guidelines, and is partly imposed on us by decisions in the upstream
MinGW.org project.  Changing this involves fielding packaging
guidelines through FPC (ie. weeks and weeks of argument), plus at
least recompiling and probably changing *all* the packages (ie. 1-2
months of work), and that's assuming we could patch all the tools to
understand our particular filesystem layout.

So this is months of work, but really for no benefit whatsoever.

If there's an actual bug, by all means file a bug report.


Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat  http://et.redhat.com/~rjones
virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines.  Tiny program with many
powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc.

More information about the mingw mailing list