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 #8 from Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-01-31 06:53:37 EST --- (In reply to comment #7) > (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. I disagree - It would have been the appropriate choice. > And *crucially* we are adding support for Mac OS X which doesn't > use mingw at all. Well, has the licence/copyright situation changed? To my knowledge MacOSX requires non-free code from Apple. > > > 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, Correct. > since this is the > choice of the mingw-w64 upstream project. They are in a much > better situation to judge how it should work. I disagree. One thing I had learnt with MinGW is them being Windows focused folks with little GNU SW experience - One of the situation this shows is situations like these. -- 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