On 9/3/21 7:13 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
On Thu, Sep 02, 2021 at 04:58:01PM -0500, Zebediah Figura (she/her)
wrote:
> It's worth pointing out that we will almost certainly need a
> fallback solution, if we do end up using shared libraries and
> *-w64-mingw32-pkg-config. This is mainly because Fedora, as far as I
> can tell, is unusual in providing mingw libraries (Debian ships a
> scant few; Arch ships none and in fact only recently even started
> shipping the cross-compiler.) And even Fedora doesn't provide all of
> the libraries we need.
>
> I'm happy to work with Fedora and with other distributions to help
> get support across the board for mingw libraries and pkg-config, but
> it's going to be a hard sell to the Wine maintainers to rely on a
> feature that isn't widely supported. Still, we might be able to use
> it where it's present...
I'm surprised - I thought Debian had a fairly complete set but I
checked just now and they don't have many. OpenSUSE's package set is
a bit thin which is also a surprise because we collaborated with them
on packaging in the early days. (I might be looking in the wrong
place for OpenSUSE).
Does Wine need 32- or 64-bit packages (or both)?
We will need both 32-bit and 64-bit MinGW packages.
(On the plus side, one of the reasons we're building things in PE format
is to have true WoW64 support. I've seen some distributions [and Mac OS]
agitating to drop 32-bit support; I don't know if Fedora is one of them,
but having everything in PE format would allow us to potentially drop
32-bit dependencies for all of our system libraries, including the ones
that aren't in PE.)