Jan Nieuwenhuizen <jann...@gnu.org> skribis: > Ricardo Wurmus writes: > >> I think these are the only patches I needed. Could you give an example >> of what things need to be patched for mingw? > > The two top commits here are for ncurses and readline > > https://github.com/janneke/guix/tree/wip-hurd+mingw
Sorry for the delay, but this is awesome work! I’m impressed that you got it working in so little time. I’m not offering a full review yet. I think it’s an additional incentive to finally merge the remaining bits from wip-hurd. ;-) My main concern is the complexity of the cross-base stuff. Why is ‘cross-gcc-core’ needed, for instance? It’s probably inevitable for the complexity to be proportional to the number of target libcs, but I think we should start thinking about how to master this complexity by factoring/abstracting things a bit. A cosmetic comment: I’d put the MinGW packages in a separate module. > (work in progress). Typically: configure flags, adding gnulib modules, > gnulib updates, dealing with non-posix or mingw-specific libc stuff. > > Many more examples here > > https://github.com/janneke/gub/tree/master/patches I think portability patches should be (1) submitted upstream ;-), and (2) applied unconditionally on all architectures (assuming they do not make any difference on the other architectures.) ‘core-updates’ is open, so now is a good time to add patches to the toolchain packages, for instance. :-) Thanks! Ludo’.
