[Mingw-cross-env-list] Combining 32-bit and 64-bit suport (was: gcc 4.5 error)

[Volker Grabsch]

Tony Theodore <address@hidden> schrieb:
> On 19 April 2010 23:12, Volker Grabsch <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Have you tried to build 32-bit binaries with mingw-w64? I.e., is there
> > any "-m32" switch or similar?
> >
> > Is there a possibility to build a "32-bit-only" or "32-bit-by-default"
> > compiler with mingw-w64? If so, we could try to switch to that one,
> > and sort out 64-bit issues later.
> 
> Yes, there's two targets - x86_64-w64-mingw32 (can be multilib) and
> i686-w64-mingw32. With the multilib, you have to do a lot of double
> builds with "-m32" and it's not always obvious where to install
> libraries.

Maybe the cleanest way is to build 32-bit stuff using the
'i686-w64-mingw32' prefix and 64-bit stuff using the
'x86_64-w64-mingw32' prefix. That way, both could reside
within the usr/ directory and share the "usr/bin/" directory
because of different prefixes.

The disadvantage would be the need to build the Binutils and GCC
twice, but that might be the lesser evil. On the other hand, we
might build one multilib GCC and provide wrapper shell scripts
that are named "i686-w64-mingw32-gcc" etc. and which call the
corresponding tool with an added "-m32" argument.

However, that's to be decided in the future. Let's concentrate
on 32-bit-only for now.


BTW, this discussion shows the importance of the "i686-pc-mingw32-"
prefixes in usr/bin/. So it appears to me that the unsolved NSIS
question as of:

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/mingw-cross-env-list/2010-02/msg00113.html

should be decided as "option (2)":

    (2) Treat NSIS like as, i.e. keep it in Mingw-cross-env and
        prefix its tools with i686-pc-mingw32.

What do you think about it?


Greets,

    Volker

-- 
Volker Grabsch
---<<(())>>---
Administrator
NotJustHosting GbR