Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini(a)redhat.com> 2009-07-28 05:14:09 EDT
I'm not sure if this proposal is serious or not, but
it would completely break every package in the repository.
I'm sure we agreed that this bug, if it is fixed, would require changing every
package in the repository.
(to work around that another change is required in the
No, this would be totally wrong! The configure and make phases should use
exactly the same prefix that is used at run-time.
What is it that you want to archieve with these changes? All that it
mass-breakage with no benefit in the end..
Many things. For example, say I'm a developer that bundles Fedora's gtk+ DLLs
with his own binary. I get a report that my binary distribution does not work
on Windows. I have to see if it's a problem in my code or in Fedora's. So I
take the Fedora sys-root, copy it to a real Windows machine, install MSYS and
try to build my package. Except that this doesn't work because the Fedora
sys-root is not a sys-root (because it includes references to paths in the
cross-compilation environment), so this does not work
Or, avoiding that the *Windows* binaries in the sysroot include references to
the /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root path. This is equivalent to having the
mock-buildroot in a binary RPM, which is flagged by rpmlint as a serious error.
IOW, I admire a lot the mingw32 packages and they were a useful tool for me.
But independent of whether they work, unfortunately they have some flaws that
are pretty fundamental and should be fixed.
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.