This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: Renaming mingw64 to mingw* for x86_64 architecure
- From: NightStrike <nightstrike at gmail dot com>
- To: "Nick Clifton" <nickc at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "Kai Tietz" <Kai dot Tietz at onevision dot com>, "Ben Elliston" <bje at au1 dot ibm dot com>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 23:33:51 -0500
- Subject: Re: Renaming mingw64 to mingw* for x86_64 architecure
- References: <OF32B366B7.A38BF823-ONC1257249.00458B7E-C1257249.00467151@onevision.de> <45A28002.90303@redhat.com>
On 1/8/07, Nick Clifton <nickc@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi Kai,
> Reasoned by some discussion with Ben Elliston I renamed the target name
> for x86_64-pc-mingw64 to x86_64-pc-mingw32. It is just a double naming of
> a 64-bit architecture and the API of mingw (and of MS) is still the Win32
> API with some small extensions for the new windows (Vista) version.
> Therefore it looks for my self reasonable to unify the OS extension for
> this platforms.
I am confused on a point here. First, the mingw community has stated
that the name of their platform is "mingw", not "mingw32" or
"mingw64". From the FAQ:
"The project's name changed from mingw32 to MinGW is to prevent the
implication that MinGW will only works on 32 bit systems (as 64 and
higher bit machines become more common, MinGW will evolve to work with
them)."
Therefore, the target should be x86_64-pc-mingw.
Second, this target name must agree with the target name for gcc,
correct? The target name for gcc is x86_64-pc-mingw64, as I
understand it. It seems like both the targets for binutils and gcc
should be x86_64-pc-mingw.
Now, granted, I am very new to this community, and this is probably
the wrong place to voice my thoughts. If anyone can provide helpful
feedback, it'd be appreciated.