Including windows-binary files for cross compiling into package
Richard W.M. Jones
rjones at redhat.com
Thu Nov 5 14:06:09 UTC 2009
On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 01:42:55PM +0100, Joost van der Sluis wrote:
> A little bit? Did you read my other mail on the subject:
>
> "That's an idea, but then we would be incompatible with upstream. I can
> try to patch the configuration files of fpc so that it searches for
> these binaries in /usr/x86_64-pc-fpc/sys-root/fpc/lib. But I prefer the
> 'standard' location. Also because other packages based in fpc relay on
> that.
This is based on a misunderstanding of the packaging guidelines.
The Fedora MinGW cross-compiler itself does not live in
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32, it lives in the usual places like /usr/bin and
/usr/lib (it's a native Fedora executable, so obviously this is where
it should go).
$ which i686-pc-mingw32-gcc
/usr/bin/i686-pc-mingw32-gcc
$ ls /usr/lib64/gcc/i686-pc-mingw32/4.3.2/
crtbegin.o include-fixed libssp.a libstdc++.a
crtend.o install-tools libssp.la libstdc++.la
crtfastmath.o libgcc.a libssp_nonshared.a libsupc++.a
include libgcov.a libssp_nonshared.la libsupc++.la
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/MinGW
>
> Another thing, the MinGW packaging guidelines needs the packages to have
> a 'MinGw' prefix, not suffix.
>
> My example used a suffix, like 'fpc-win32'. Do you think I should use
> 'win32-fpc' instead? Again: this sounds logical when you have a complete
> build-environment or something like that. But in this case I think
> 'fpc-win32' is more logical.
You should use a prefix so that autoconf knows how to find your
cross-compiler. Read the documentation for AC_CHECK_TOOL.
Rich.
--
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines. Tiny program with many
powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc.
http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list