Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673784 --- Comment #7 from Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-01-31 06:17:04 EST --- (In reply to comment #6) > > I'm okay with using a different prefix like the crossdesktop-* which Richard > > suggested if you prefer that > > IMO, mingw-filesystem would be an appropriate name, because that's what it > currently is - The rest of it is wishful thinking. "mingw" has always been an unfortunate choice of name. Really the cross-compiler has very little to do with the mingw.org project. mingw-w64 is a completely separate fork. And there is a separate mingw.org-related binary project which is nothing to do with us, but people frequently get confused over the two. And *crucially* we are adding support for Mac OS X which doesn't use mingw at all. This is why I'm suggesting crossdesktop-* or some other choice which doesn't involve the 5 letters "mingw". > > The target name x86_64-w64-mingw32 might look a bit odd for outsiders, but it's > > the default target name used by the mingw-w64 developers. > Well, ... this doesn't mean their decisions are wise ;) > > x86_64-w64-mingw32 (cpu=x86_64, os=mingw32) is multiply problematic: > - the "32" in mingw32 originally stood for "MinGW on 32bit Windows", > => a 64bit MinGW for "MinGW on 64bit Windows" should be named "mingw64" > - Configure scripts currently presume "os=mingw32" to imply 32bit MinGW. > ... > > I.e. to me reasonable choices would be > x86_64-pc-mingw + i686-pc-mingw > or > x86_64-pc-mingw64 + i686-pc-mingw32 Whatever you think doesn't really matter, since this is the choice of the mingw-w64 upstream project. They are in a much better situation to judge how it should work. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review