From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: rfc/rfh: i686-w64-mingw32 cross target Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 22:48:23 +0200 Message-ID: <8760w2nzl4.fsf@elephly.net> References: <87vb492l7s.fsf@drakenvlieg.flower> <877fgio11v.fsf@elephly.net> <87r3eq2y2s.fsf@drakenvlieg.flower> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60326) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aljW7-0002l2-MU for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 16:48:36 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aljW6-0007Vn-Rx for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Mar 2016 16:48:35 -0400 In-reply-to: <87r3eq2y2s.fsf@drakenvlieg.flower> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Jan Nieuwenhuizen Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Jan Nieuwenhuizen writes: > Thanks, that's great! Are these the only patches you had to make? > I find that for mingw, many packages need to be patched and it > would be nice to have support for that. I think these are the only patches I needed. Could you give an example of what things need to be patched for mingw? ~~ Ricardo