Re: cygport cross compile(r) support [was: Re: cygport patch: suppress libtool fixup step]

2010-07-09 Thread Yaakov (Cygwin/X)
On Fri, 2010-07-09 at 12:54 -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote: > I'm getting whiplash trying to read about these issues in cygwin-apps and > cygwin. If Yaakov doesn't mind, I'd like to make discussions of cygport > on-topic in cygwin-apps. It's sort of been that way for a while now anyway. That's

Re: cygport cross compile(r) support [was: Re: cygport patch: suppress libtool fixup step]

2010-07-09 Thread Charles Wilson
On 7/9/2010 12:54 PM, Christopher Faylor wrote: On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 10:34:09AM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: On 7/7/2010 11:39 PM, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 22:16 -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: Hmm. That's what I *was* doing: JonY's -src provides a cygport that I didn'

Re: cygport cross compile(r) support [was: Re: cygport patch: suppress libtool fixup step]

2010-07-09 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 10:34:09AM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: >On 7/7/2010 11:39 PM, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: >> On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 22:16 -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: >>> Hmm. That's what I *was* doing: JonY's -src provides a cygport that > >> I didn't mean the .cygport(5), I meant cygport(1).

Re: cygport cross compile(r) support [was: Re: cygport patch: suppress libtool fixup step]

2010-07-08 Thread Charles Wilson
On 7/7/2010 11:39 PM, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 22:16 -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: >> Hmm. That's what I *was* doing: JonY's -src provides a cygport that > I didn't mean the .cygport(5), I meant cygport(1). The goal is to make > these workarounds unnecessary. Sure. There's

Re: cygport cross compile(r) support [was: Re: cygport patch: suppress libtool fixup step]

2010-07-07 Thread Yaakov (Cygwin/X)
On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 22:16 -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: > Hmm. That's what I *was* doing: JonY's -src provides a cygport that > appears to work. You have to impose some workarounds, like: > > RESTRICT=strip > > and manually use the target strip tool within src_install, but...it > *works*. (E.g

Re: cygport cross compile(r) support [was: Re: cygport patch: suppress libtool fixup step]

2010-07-07 Thread NightStrike
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 10:16 PM, Charles Wilson wrote: >> OOTB gcc multilib does not build, nor AFAICS do clear-cut patches exist >> to fix it.  Others in #mingw-w64 seem to think that multilib isn't worth >> the headache, at least not yet.  We'll see what I come up with over the >> next few days,

cygport cross compile(r) support [was: Re: cygport patch: suppress libtool fixup step]

2010-07-07 Thread Charles Wilson
On 7/7/2010 8:14 PM, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote: > On Wed, 2010-07-07 at 15:21 -0400, Charles Wilson wrote: >> Really? Other than the packaging issues, I had no problem with JonY's >> src snapshot, compiling a 64bit-default, but multilib enabled, gcc. did >> something break upstream between when J