Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
--- Comment #2 from Hin-Tak Leung <htl10(a)users.sourceforge.net> 2009-07-15 16:22:30
Created an attachment (id=353901)
diff of my spec vs the fefora -0.7 spec file
As a proof of concept, I have unpacked the fedora
mingw32-gcc-4.4.0-0.7.fc11.src.rpm and modified it to use the upstream release
tar ball, plus all 13 of mingw patches.
5 of the fedora patches didn't apply (patch 0,24,25,26,27):
I think both patch 24 and 25 was incorporated upstream and can be dropped, and
26,27 are partially incorporated upstream and need some work; not sure about
the purpose of patch 0.
Out of the 13 mingw patches from gcc-4.4.0-mingw32-src-2.tar.gz (from mingw),
two has slight problem: "gcc-4.4.0-20090418-dllimport-libstdc++.patch" has some
typo itself which is reported upstream (see my recent post to mingw-devel
mailing list), "gcc-4.4.0-20090418-libjava_s.patch" duplicates one chunk which
is also in the fedora patch. Both are trivial problems and quite easy to fix
for anybody who knows a bit of C.
I also noticed that the new default is to build the language-specific
libfortran.dll, etc, but there is no sjlj dll (no exception?), so I added the
disable-shared (to stop the generation of libfortran, libobjc, etc) and
I hope somebody examine the 5 failed fedora patches (maybe take a look at the
native compiler src rpm? it seems to be newer than mingw32-gcc) and also merges
the mingw patches in properly.
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.