Re: [Mingw-cross-env-list] GCC 4.4.1

[Tony Theodore]

2009/11/22 Tony Theodore <address@hidden>

> BTW, there are already TDM patches for gcc-4.4.1, but I
> wasn't able to get them to work. In the meantime we updated
> Binutils, but GCC-4.4.1 still doesn't work. It fails with:
>
>    configure: error: Link tests are not allowed after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES.
>
> I attached a patch to switch from GCC 4.4.0 to 4.4.1, in
> case anyone likes to work on that issue.

After much investigation, that error seems to be caused by a failure
to detect cross-compilation of libstdc++v3. I haven't been able to set
the cross-compile explicitly, and after a process of elimination, it's
the ehstatic.patch that is causing this, but I can't see where. There
are other errors (with pthreads) if this patch is simply excluded.

Oddly, not applying any of the patches allows the entire environment
to build successfully with much the same results across platforms as
the latest dev version. I'm not sure if the resulting
libraries/binaries will function correctly without the patches, but a
simple sqlite.exe works.

So I didn't have any luck yet getting the patches to work, but I did test building the qt demos without them. The resulting binaries seem to work well, apart from some missing Open GL features and sqlite support (which I don't think are entirely related to the gcc used).

This leads me to some other thoughts about testing. I've been trying to find some small applications to build as a test and I realised, after looking at the IMCROSS project, that samples and demos are the ideal place to start. At the moment I just changed the qt configure options, but I'd like to hear some opinions on how best to structure the building of them to keep them separate from the rest of the libraries and toolchain.

I imagine a new make target, but beyond that, I'm not sure:

Should dependencies be built?
Where to put the makefiles and binaries?
What to call it (samples/tests)?

Your thoughts.

Tony