Gunnstein Lye wrote: > Thanks for the info. Do you really have to build separate binaries > of gcc for each target? I thought I could use the same binary for > linux (native) and windows (crosscompiling).
Not to my knowledge. The code generation is more or less identical, but some of the symbol naming rules are different, the decisions as to which sections to place symbols into is different, and of course the binutils formats are entirely different. You *can* do this with cygwin, where the only difference from MinGW is the C runtime library. The compiler supports a -mno-cygwin flag that basically turns it into the same toolchain you get with a --target=mingw32 build. Unfortunately it turns out that cygwin doesn't install these tools under the conventional "platform-program" names (e.g. mingw32-gcc), so I'm not sure how cygwin users are supposed to use them with a autoconf environment which requires those names for cross compiling. For right now, cygwin users are going to have to install or build the mingw stuff even though it's redundant. Andy _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
