Hi Stephen,
Stephen Kitt wrote:
> We still need to figure out how to handle the triplet. There are multiple
> goals, from end users’ perspectives, some conflicting:
>
> * provide a Windows cross-compiler with a good selection of libraries, within
> Debian, so that it’s easy to build Windows
Hi Joe,
On Thu, 26 Dec 2019 22:20:45 -0500, Joe Nahmias wrote:
> I recently became interested in cross-compiling software from Debian to
> Windows. To my delight, I found the gcc-mingw-w64 & mingw-w64-tools
> packages already in Debian (thanks Stephen!). However, I see that they
> are using a
Greetings!
I recently became interested in cross-compiling software from Debian to
Windows. To my delight, I found the gcc-mingw-w64 & mingw-w64-tools
packages already in Debian (thanks Stephen!). However, I see that they
are using a workaround of a /usr/${triplet}/ path, rather than
Hi!
On Tue, 2014-09-09 at 23:28:10 +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote:
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 15:51:12 +0200, Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org wrote:
But I just noticed that a proper triplet was accepted in the config.git
repo around 2012 (commit f16804b79ee5a23a9994a1cdc760cd9ba813148a), this
is what
Hi Guillem,
(I'm dropping Dimitri from the cc since he's no longer interested in this!)
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 15:51:12 +0200, Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org wrote:
On Sat, 2014-08-23 at 18:40:28 -0700, Stephen Kitt wrote:
OK, so I've been working on this off-and-on for the last few months,
Hi!
On Sat, 2014-08-23 at 18:40:28 -0700, Stephen Kitt wrote:
On Wed, 4 Dec 2013 09:06:17 +0100, Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org wrote:
On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 00:00:21 +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
I've carefully reviewed the whole thread and re-reviewed the proposed
patch:
*
On Wed, 4 Dec 2013 09:06:17 +0100, Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org wrote:
On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 00:00:21 +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
I've carefully reviewed the whole thread and re-reviewed the proposed
patch:
* vendor tag is _not_ used to encode API/ABI, GNU_SYSTEM is
w64-mingw32
Hi!
On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 00:00:21 +, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
On 3 December 2013 22:42, Stephen Kitt sk...@debian.org wrote:
Is there any chance the attached version could go in? It's against
current git, minus the previous changes to cputable which were wrong.
Now that Debian is
Hi Guillem,
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 03:34:07PM +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 13:01:03 +0200, Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org wrote:
Sorry, I thought I had replied but it appears that was not the case,
it was on my radar to come back to it anyway, thanks for the reminder.
On 3 December 2013 22:42, Stephen Kitt sk...@debian.org wrote:
Hi Guillem,
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 03:34:07PM +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote:
On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 13:01:03 +0200, Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org wrote:
Sorry, I thought I had replied but it appears that was not the case,
it was on
Hi,
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 09:10:55 -0700, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com
wrote:
Guillem Jover wrote:
The main issue I have with this request is that the upstream triplet just
seems wrong, as it encodes part of the ABI in the vendor field. That's
AFAIR, from reading the thread back then.
Hi,
Guillem Jover wrote:
The main issue I have with this request is that the upstream triplet just
seems wrong, as it encodes part of the ABI in the vendor field. That's
AFAIR, from reading the thread back then.
For dpkg tools the vendor is irrelevant, and having to take it into
account
Hi Guillem,
On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 13:01:03 +0200, Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org wrote:
On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 10:30:19 +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
This is an old bug. But at the debconf multiple people thought it has
been fixed already, while I don't think it was.
One small difference is
Hi Stephen,
Stephen Kitt wrote:
[...]
I've added tests to deactivate stack protector and relro on Windows,
Good. Thanks much for that.
and more
controversially I've added x86 and x64 entries in cputable.
I think that's a
Hi Jonathan,
On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 07:57:04 -0700, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com
wrote:
Stephen Kitt wrote:
[...]
I've added tests to deactivate stack protector and relro on Windows,
Good. Thanks much for that.
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 07:57:22PM +0200, Stephen Kitt wrote:
All things considered the simplest way forward is to drop the cputable patch;
^just
(and do nothing more)
at least that way, we'll know that the packages that do build are
On 11 August 2012 15:57, Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com wrote:
controversially I've added x86 and x64 entries in cputable.
I think that's a no-go, sorry. The problem is that after that change
there is no longer one unambiguous Debian arch for each GNU triplet,
which breaks
ditto. this
This is an old bug. But at the debconf multiple people thought it has
been fixed already, while I don't think it was.
One small difference is that in the near future armhf/armel might be a
valid cpu architecture for mingw-w64 port.
The proposal over here http://wiki.debian.org/Mingw-W64 needs
Hi!
On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 10:30:19 +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
This is an old bug. But at the debconf multiple people thought it has
been fixed already, while I don't think it was.
One small difference is that in the near future armhf/armel might be a
valid cpu architecture for mingw-w64
On 8 August 2012 12:01, Guillem Jover guil...@debian.org wrote:
Hi!
On Wed, 2012-08-08 at 10:30:19 +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
This is an old bug. But at the debconf multiple people thought it has
been fixed already, while I don't think it was.
One small difference is that in the near
20 matches
Mail list logo
