On Thu, 2009-11-05 at 14:06 +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 01:42:55PM +0100, Joost van der Sluis wrote: > > A little bit? Did you read my other mail on the subject: > > > > "That's an idea, but then we would be incompatible with upstream. I can > > try to patch the configuration files of fpc so that it searches for > > these binaries in /usr/x86_64-pc-fpc/sys-root/fpc/lib. But I prefer the > > 'standard' location. Also because other packages based in fpc relay on > > that. > > This is based on a misunderstanding of the packaging guidelines. > > The Fedora MinGW cross-compiler itself does not live in > /usr/i686-pc-mingw32, it lives in the usual places like /usr/bin and > /usr/lib (it's a native Fedora executable, so obviously this is where > it should go). > $ which i686-pc-mingw32-gcc > /usr/bin/i686-pc-mingw32-gcc > $ ls /usr/lib64/gcc/i686-pc-mingw32/4.3.2/ > crtbegin.o include-fixed libssp.a libstdc++.a > crtend.o install-tools libssp.la libstdc++.la > crtfastmath.o libgcc.a libssp_nonshared.a libsupc++.a > include libgcov.a libssp_nonshared.la libsupc++.la Yes, I understood that, but the object files in windows-format should be in /usr/i686-pc-fpc/sys-root/fpc/lib, right? That's what I meant. If you are actually on windows, MinGW needs a directory-structure with paths like 'lib', 'bin' etc. But fpc doesn't need that. Well, the application should be in 'program files', but I doubt that that's what we want in a Fedora-package. So if this 'sys-root' path mimics a windows-directory structure, that has no advantage whatsoever for the freepascal compiler. > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/MinGW > > > > Another thing, the MinGW packaging guidelines needs the packages to have > > a 'MinGw' prefix, not suffix. > > > > My example used a suffix, like 'fpc-win32'. Do you think I should use > > 'win32-fpc' instead? Again: this sounds logical when you have a complete > > build-environment or something like that. But in this case I think > > 'fpc-win32' is more logical. > > You should use a prefix so that autoconf knows how to find your > cross-compiler. Read the documentation for AC_CHECK_TOOL. Autoconf? With Pascal? What's next, using 'make'? ;) You don't need those tools with Pascal, there's no need for makefiles because of the unit-system. Also, there's no separate compiler-executable for cross compiling to windows. The 'normal' compiler is able to compile for each OS which is supported, as long as the architecture stays the same. (for i386-arm you need a cross-compiler) You can do 'fpc --OS_TARGET=darwin' and you'll get a OS/X executable. Well, that is, if the linker (ld) supports darwin as a target. For windows the fpc-compiler has a build-in linker, so even that is not necessary. The extra package what I want to make consist only of the pre-compiled run time library (rtl and fcl). Joost. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
