<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Steven Edwards <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:winehacker@gmail.com">winehacker@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 1:21 PM, Alexandre Julliard<<a href="mailto:julliard@winehq.org">julliard@winehq.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> This is not a configure option, it's the name of the installed mingw32<br>
> binaries. They are supposed to follow the GNU naming convention for<br>
> cross-compilers, and they do on all sane distros AFAIK.<br>
<br>
</div>Right I get that. I just mean that its pretty common to see homebrewed<br>
cross-compilers with just mingw32 as the prefix. �The reason I guess<br>
is that on Windows (c:\mingw\bin\*) it does not follow the gnu naming<br>
convention because it does not have to follow it and people carry that<br>
over when they are rolling their own cross-compiler. Now that most<br>
distro's are shipping mingw packages this is less common. I guess your<br>
argument is right and anyone rolling their own should get with the<br>
program and follow the standard.<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
--<br>
Steven Edwards<br>
<br>
"There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and<br>
that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo<br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>Fedora, Debian/Ubuntu, SUSE, and Mandriva come with complete toolkits that follow the GNU naming convention for the Win32 cross compiler.<br>