[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 21:10:56 +0800
- From: xr at trasin.net (Ray)
- Subject: MinGW Toolchain
To install tool-chain in windows, the install guide in rtems wiki, although a little old, is all you needed to install then. You should install MinGW, MSYS,MSYSDTK. It must be admitted that it is pain to run cygwin/MGW in windows. Because when you compile sth like gcc, it will take you hours, and MinGW is a bit faster though.
Just to be care:
1) Some version of cygwin/MinGW have memory leak problems in windows.
2) MinGW do not recognize the path we used in linux. So the image compiled in linux, can not debug with gdb run in MinGW
3) Some version of gcc/gdb can not compiled in MinGW, it is better to download gcc/gdb with MinGW patch from MinGW official site.
I guess that if the install shield provided in rtems-ftp also includes the MGW toolsets in it. It will be much better.
BTW, I think there is yet another choice for windows user. That is colinux (sth like vmware), it is faster and stable.
Thanks & Best Regards!
Ray, xr at trasin.net
----- Receiving the following content -----
From: Ralf Corsepius
Receiver: Scott Newell
Time: 2007-11-21, 14:03:41
Subject: Re: MinGW Toolchain
>On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 10:29 -0600, Scott Newell wrote:
>> At 10:09 AM 11/20/2007 , Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> >On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 16:54 +0100, Wolfram Wadepohl wrote:
>> >> also cygwin was not as stable it should be.
>> >... I would not subscribe to this.
>> I take it the old build_alias problem is now fixed?
>Don't know. It's been years since I heard about the build_alias issue
>for the last time.
>All I can say:
>- Wrt. building *nix->cygwin/mingw cross-toolchains, building cygwin
>toolchains is one magnitude easier. The basic procedures are the same,
>but the details on MinGW are nastier.
>- Wrt. maintaining cygwin/mingw->rtems toolchains, cygwin is one
>magnitude easier, because Cygwin has a centralized "distro" upstream.
>Problem with Cygwin is it's stagnating upstream.
>The converse applies to MinGW - It doesn't seem to have reasonable and
>stable "distro" upstream. You end up building everything yourselves.
>- Using cygwin is one magnitude easier, because it's more "*nix'ish"
>than MinGW. The situation of MinGW is gradually improving, nevertheless
>there still are many pitfalls.
>- Cygwin is sharing some amount of sources with rtems (newlib).
>I.e. RTEMS buys in some amount of code and QA from Cygwin. This doesn't
>apply to MinGW.
>> Has anyone compared build times under MinGW to Cygwin? Cygwin sure seems
>I am using neither. I am occasionally building *nix->MinGW/Cygwin
>toolchains and am working on Canadian-cross building packages on Linux.
>Have you tried to build MinGW, GCC, binutils, gdb under MinGW?
>AFAIK, this isn't possible, but I could be wrong.
>rtems-users mailing list
>rtems-users at rtems.com