On 08/09/2011 06:54 PM, NightStrike wrote: > On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Farkas Levente <[email protected]> wrote: >> hi, >> is there any reason why there is a separate crt and headers packages? >> - why there is not one common source when the source is common? >> - why there is not one common binary (noarch) rpm when both required for >> development? or we don't need the crt after we build gcc? >> but even in this case wouldn't be useful to merge these packages source? >> >> ps. anyway i'm just like to update it to the 2.0 rc1. > > You guys are probably just mimicking us. We break it out into > separate directories because the headers are needed at one point in > the toolchain build and the crt is needed at another. Further, some > of our users only have a need of a subset of what we provide, so we > make it easier for them. > > I can't see a reason for a distro to separate it out, tho.
Fedora needs them separate for the very same reason -- the headers and the crt are needed at different times when boostrapping the toolchain. We have lots of different architectures (i686, x86_64, ppc, ppc64, arm, arm with hardfp, s390x and probably more I forgot) and all of these need bootstrapping. Having separate packages makes it easier to bootstrap each individual architecture. If there was one single package containing crt + headers, we'd have to modify the spec file to turn the crt off and on while in the middle of bootstrapping; separating the two packages avoids that. See this wiki page on how we bootstrap the toolchain in Fedora: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW/CrossCompilerFramework#Phase_3:_Bootstrap_the_mingw-w64_toolchain > On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Farkas Levente <[email protected]> wrote: >> ps. anyway i'm just like to update it to the 2.0 rc1. Talk to epienbro on IRC, I belive he already started work on this. Hope this helps, Kalev _______________________________________________ mingw mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/mingw
