On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Ruben Van Boxem <[email protected]> wrote: >> > The only solution I see *right now* is one of these: >> > 1. Install the DLLs manually (how stupid) >> >> Relying always on automated install is always equally stupid >> therefore I suggest that you stick to this #1, because manual >> manipulation is always 100% reliable > > > I guess there's no other option. Automated install is supposed to work > though. I don't agree with your "equally stupid". > Keeping up with GCC's internal build structure to find where exactly it > decides to put the runtime DLLs for a certain arch is a crappy way of > installing things (the DLLs are plain *missing* in the install prefix, I > have to dig through the build dir for them). > This is what "make install" is for. It should be fixed. > > At least the cross-compilers are installed right.
I'd ahve to agree with Ruben here. Seems to be a pretty clear bugin gcc. I'm guessing it doesn't happen with linux multilibs. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Mingw-w64-public mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
