Example "cross-zlib" package added to Mercurial

Farkas Levente lfarkas at lfarkas.org
Mon Feb 16 09:12:03 UTC 2009

Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>>>     +BuildRequires:  mingw64-filesystem >= 10
>> ihmo here again would be better to one common cross-filesystem which
>> contains all macros, script, dirs etc. why we create 3 such packages? i
>> think now and in a few months as many things get clear (as daniel
>> suggested) would be better to create test packages based on a new
>> 'feature for f12 cross-compiler'.
> There's not a lot of commonality.  The filesystem layouts are quite
> different between the three cross-compilers.

most macros are very similar and keep them in one common packages can
help to stay them in sync.

>>>     +BuildRequires:  mingw64-gcc
>>>     +BuildRequires:  mingw64-binutils
>> and again if we create cross-xxx packages then we can create
>> meta-packages like cross-gcc which requires all gcc and these BR can be
>> 3 times shorter.
> On the other hand, this is an actively bad idea.  We are currently
> using 3 different versions of GCC from 3 different upstream projects.
> Binutils doesn't even exist on Darwin.  Go and have a look at this
> diagram again:
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/fedora-mingw/2009-February/000465.html

ok may be not for gcc but imho it's much cleaner to:
BuildRequires: cross-zlib
BuildRequires: mingw32-zlib
BuildRequires: mingw64-zlib
BuildRequires: darwin-zlib

  Levente                               "Si vis pacem para bellum!"

More information about the mingw mailing list