MinGW-w64 packaging guidelines

rubenvb · 2012-05-03 16:20:13

I am the submitter/maintainer of the AUR MinGW-w64 toolchain packages, and have noticed that people have begun to step up and create library packages for the cross-compilers. Awesome!

I would however like to set up some basic PKGBUILD guidelines to ensure the quality and usability of packages depending on the MinGW-w64 toolchain.

Can I just append a "MinGW-w64 PKGBUILD guidelines" section on https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Ar … guidelines ?

It would mostly be analogous to the MinGW page with a few important differences.

I feel this would promote the adoption of the MinGW-w64 toolchain to supersede the MinGW.org toolchain (which cannot produce Windows x64 binaries) currently in use in [Community].

Thanks!

the.ridikulus.rat · 2012-05-03 16:49:54

I support keeping mingw-w64 (with multilib) instead of mingw32 in the repos.

@rubenvb: Anyway is there some unofficial repo containing mingw-w64 packages for x86_64 host?

rubenvb · 2012-05-03 16:57:55

the.ridikulus.rat wrote:

@rubenvb: Anyway is there some unofficial repo containing mingw-w64 packages for x86_64 host?

Nope, sorry. Didn't get around to setting up the Arch Build System chroot thingie. If you really don't want to build the package from AUR, just grab one of my builds from the MinGW-w64 site at Sourceforge. I've built all current GCC release versions for your enjoyment.

The multilib thing is a point of discussion though. There are numerous packages out there that don't know how to handle that correctly... Two prefixed toolchains are guaranteed trouble-free. But as I said, it is a point of discussion.

Last edited by rubenvb (2012-05-03 16:58:27)

the.ridikulus.rat · 2012-05-03 18:29:36

rubenvb wrote:

the.ridikulus.rat wrote:
@rubenvb: Anyway is there some unofficial repo containing mingw-w64 packages for x86_64 host?
Nope, sorry. Didn't get around to setting up the Arch Build System chroot thingie. If you really don't want to build the package from AUR, just grab one of my builds from the MinGW-w64 site at Sourceforge. I've built all current GCC release versions for your enjoyment.
The multilib thing is a point of discussion though. There are numerous packages out there that don't know how to handle that correctly... Two prefixed toolchains are guaranteed trouble-free. But as I said, it is a point of discussion.

Yes, I know. I used mingw-w64-bin https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=43761 (I was the original uploader BTW), but those builds do not have multilib enabled. I want support for both win64 and win32 from the same build. Thats the reason why I asked whether you/someone maintain any unofficial repo for mingw-w64 WITH MULTILIB.

rubenvb · 2012-05-03 18:41:25

the.ridikulus.rat wrote:

Yes, I know. I used mingw-w64-bin https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=43761 (I was the original uploader BTW), but those builds do not have multilib enabled. I want support for both win64 and win32 from the same build. Thats the reason why I asked whether you/someone maintain any unofficial repo for mingw-w64 WITH MULTILIB.

Note my mingw-w64-gcc package has both i686-w64-mingw32-gcc and x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc, so supports both target architectures. Multilib would be support for "-m32" or "-m64", which is sometimes probmematic, not to mention 3rd party package installation strangeness with lib and lib32 with a shared include folder...

the.ridikulus.rat · 2012-05-03 18:45:52

rubenvb wrote:

the.ridikulus.rat wrote:
Yes, I know. I used mingw-w64-bin https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=43761 (I was the original uploader BTW), but those builds do not have multilib enabled. I want support for both win64 and win32 from the same build. Thats the reason why I asked whether you/someone maintain any unofficial repo for mingw-w64 WITH MULTILIB.
Note my mingw-w64-gcc package has both i686-w64-mingw32-gcc and x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc, so supports both target architectures. Multilib would be support for "-m32" or "-m64", which is sometimes probmematic, not to mention 3rd party package installation strangeness with lib and lib32 with a shared include folder...

Oh. Ok. Thats fine. Is that the same case with your(?) builds (-bin) in sourceforge? In that case I will directly use the -bin package. Its been a long time since I stopped using that. Right now I use http://tdm-gcc.tdragon.net/ in Windows (not too much).

rubenvb · 2012-05-03 18:50:33

the.ridikulus.rat wrote:

Oh. Ok. Thats fine. Is that the same case with your(?) builds (-bin) in sourceforge? In that case I will directly use the -bin package. Its been a long time since I stopped using that. Right now I use http://tdm-gcc.tdragon.net/ in Windows (not too much).

My builds (not the AUR package of which the link won't work anymore as I've changed around the directory layout on SF) are single architecture. You'll need to download two files to get everything. There's a "mingw32" and a "mingw64".

I wouldn't recommend TDM, because he uses non-standard patches which make everything incompatible with upstream GCC.

the.ridikulus.rat · 2012-05-03 18:54:48

rubenvb wrote:

the.ridikulus.rat wrote:
Oh. Ok. Thats fine. Is that the same case with your(?) builds (-bin) in sourceforge? In that case I will directly use the -bin package. Its been a long time since I stopped using that. Right now I use http://tdm-gcc.tdragon.net/ in Windows (not too much).
My builds (not the AUR package of which the link won't work anymore as I've changed around the directory layout on SF) are single architecture. You'll need to download two files to get everything. There's a "mingw32" and a "mingw64".

Thats exactly what I don't want to do. Downloading two files leads to lots of bandwidth wastage, instead of a single download containing multilib enabled mingw-w64 gcc binary (which supports -m32 and -m64).

I wouldn't recommend TDM, because he uses non-standard patches which make everything incompatible with upstream GCC.

Which pre-compiled mingw-w64 (with multilib) download would you recommend for Windows 7 x64 host? (MODs: I don't know whether this is considered off-topic discussion. If so, sorry, but please inform me.)

Last edited by the.ridikulus.rat (2012-05-04 10:37:40)

kynikos · 2012-05-04 10:13:11

rubenvb wrote:

Can I just append a "MinGW-w64 PKGBUILD guidelines" section on https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Ar … guidelines ?

I see the thread has taken another direction, but if you still need an answer, you could simply try to improve the https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Mi … Guidelines article.

rubenvb · 2012-05-19 11:23:59

kynikos wrote:

rubenvb wrote:
Can I just append a "MinGW-w64 PKGBUILD guidelines" section on https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Ar … guidelines ?
I see the thread has taken another direction, but if you still need an answer, you could simply try to improve the https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Mi … Guidelines article.

Hmm, ok. But that would double the size of the page (cause I'd need to modify everything said for the mingw-w64 names valid in context). That's why I wondered if a new page wouldn't be better?

kynikos · 2012-05-20 10:11:42

rubenvb wrote:

Hmm, ok. But that would double the size of the page (cause I'd need to modify everything said for the mingw-w64 names valid in context). That's why I wondered if a new page wouldn't be better?

That article is actually quite short (most of it are examples), so doubling its size wouldn't be a problem. Moreover, it already mentions mingw-w64, so you'd have to adapt it anyway.

rubenvb · 2012-05-30 12:42:44

I have edited the MinGW PKGBUILD Guidelines Wiki article and added instructions for MinGW-w64 in pretty much copy-paste style with the necessary adaptations. Perhaps the common stuff should be factored out, although that would split the full list of guidelines, making it less easy to get a complete view on all the items.

I added a small introduction detailing the difference between the two projects, and what MinGW-w64 offers more.

I first created a seperate Wiki page here:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Mi … Guidelines
which can be deleted at your leasure. Sorry for this noise.

If you have any more suggestions, I'll see what I can do.

kynikos · 2012-05-31 11:30:05

Well done, I've just done some minor style fixes, I think it looks good, doesn't it? ^^

About the separate page, I've redirected it to the section where you moved it.

Arch Linux

#1 2012-05-03 16:20:13

MinGW-w64 packaging guidelines

#2 2012-05-03 16:49:54

Re: MinGW-w64 packaging guidelines

#3 2012-05-03 16:57:55

Re: MinGW-w64 packaging guidelines

#4 2012-05-03 18:29:36

Re: MinGW-w64 packaging guidelines

#5 2012-05-03 18:41:25

Re: MinGW-w64 packaging guidelines

#6 2012-05-03 18:45:52

Re: MinGW-w64 packaging guidelines

#7 2012-05-03 18:50:33

Re: MinGW-w64 packaging guidelines

#8 2012-05-03 18:54:48

Re: MinGW-w64 packaging guidelines

#9 2012-05-04 10:13:11

Re: MinGW-w64 packaging guidelines

#10 2012-05-19 11:23:59

Re: MinGW-w64 packaging guidelines

#11 2012-05-20 10:11:42

Re: MinGW-w64 packaging guidelines

#12 2012-05-30 12:42:44

Re: MinGW-w64 packaging guidelines

#13 2012-05-31 11:30:05

Re: MinGW-w64 packaging guidelines

Board footer