On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 2:00 AM, Paarvai Naai <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Ozkan,
>
> Sorry to bug you, but can you give a little more explanation on how
> libtool is used by the configure script for -w64- support and why not
> having this fix will break things?
>

Libtool < 2.2.6/2.2.7 may not detect w64 libraries properly so the
linkage would fail. Please look at what the patch does: it just updates
the pe-x86_64 magic that is already in libtool 2.2.7.

> I think it might be a good general education not only for me but for
> others on the group.
>
> Thanks again,
> Paarvai
>

--
Ozkan


>
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Ozkan Sezer <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Paarvai Naai <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I want to gain an understanding for the reasoning behind the
>>> "libtool_patch" function used in the "Custom toolchain builds"
>>> distributed by Ozkan Sezer.
>>>
>>> I don't see this mentioned in the standard cross-compiler instructions
>>> found on the mingw-w64 project page:
>>> http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/mingw-w64/wiki/Cross%20Win32%20and%20Win64%20compiler
>>>
>>> But this libtool patch is used consistently for a number of the
>>> upstream sources.  Can someone explain the rationale behind this?
>>
>> It fixes libtool for proper win64 support. Upgrading to new libtool
>> may not be trivial, but the fix itself is. Not every source need that
>> fix, but applying it doesn't hurt either. Some libraries may not even
>> compile without it (libxml2 comes to mind, can't remember else at
>> the moment.)
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance!
>>> Paarvai
>>
>> --
>> Ozkan
>>
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint
What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone?
Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first
_______________________________________________
Mingw-w64-public mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public

Reply via email to