This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [RFC] cygport: arch-specific workdir
- From: David Rothenberger <daveroth at acm dot org>
- To: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 10:18:06 -0700
- Subject: Re: [RFC] cygport: arch-specific workdir
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <5329C6AE dot 7080803 at cornell dot edu> <5329DC45 dot 7070806 at users dot sourceforge dot net> <533472F3 dot 6000504 at users dot sourceforge dot net>
Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On 2014-03-19 13:04, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>> On 2014-03-19 11:32, Ken Brown wrote:
>>> I've just started experimenting with using cygport for cross compiling,
>>> and I've come across two issues:
>>> 1. This is just a request: The latest cygport for Fedora appends i686 or
>>> x86_64 to the name of the working directory. I would find it convenient
>>> if cygport did the same thing on Cygwin, at least if the --32 or --64
>>> option is specified.
>> Actually, that is experimental code (based on a request from another
>> cygport user) that was accidentally shipped when I had to reroll the
>> source tarball for compatibility with F20/UnversionedDocDirs. Would
>> people like to see this done always, never, or only when cross-building?
> There hasn't been much comment on this. Since it would be a visible
> change for package maintainers, I would appreciate more of a consensus.
> Are there any objections to making the workdir always arch-specific
> (IOW name-ver-rel.arch)?
I would favor making the workdir always arch-specific. It would allow me
to build my package for both archs at the same time. Currently, I have
to build for one, move the created packages, then rebuild for the other
David Rothenberger ---- email@example.com
"Indecision is the basis of flexibility"
-- button at a Science Fiction convention.