Hi Dave, thanks for the feedback.
* Dave Korn wrote on Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 01:16:37PM CET: > This is GCC PR40125, and I don't suppose I'm going to be able to fix it > before 4.5.0. Kai suggested we should leave them in gcc's private dir (which > is where the language runtime import libs go, not libdir), but libdir is as > good as any. > > I think that in all the focus on bitness, and whether or not it is necessary > to separate 32-vs-64, has distracted from the very different issue of how we > keep 32-bit MinGW DLLs from clashing with 32-bit MinGW-W64 DLLs. That is a > situation *exactly* analagous to the Cygwin-vs-MinGW clash, and I think it > fully justifies using a separate prefix. [...] > So I think what I'd conclude is that MinGW-W64 should have its own prefix, > but it should be the same one for 32-bit and 64-bit W64 DLLs. That would be fine with me. But I suggest that any policy decision for such a naming change should be done by those projects (MinGW-W64, MinGW, or both), documented there, a flag day announced, and then libtool should follow suit, not the other way round. Or maybe, just maybe, they'll re-merge before it gets that far ... Cheers, Ralf _______________________________________________ http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
