Re: Cygwin x86 end-of-life

[Achim Gratz <Stromeko@nexgo.de>]

Brian Inglis writes:
> As mingw64-i686 target is cross for native Windows 32, and we are
> dropping Cygwin support for Windows 32, should we not also be dropping
> cross support for native Windows 32, as so few people are using it,
> and software developers, packagers, and distros, including us, are
> dropping it as platform and target?

I am unlikely to update that toolchain when I move gcc to version 12 or
later.

> Also there are 309 unmaintained mingw64 packages, so perhaps reducing
> the double (over the base package) extra work of maintaining mingw64
> packages to a single extra cross might enable us to persuade some
> maintainers to pick up unmaintained native Windows 64 cross
> mingw64-x86_64 packages corresponding to the base packages they
> maintain?

I can't speak for others, but on my end there's not been much of a
problem with having the MingW64 packages in two flavors in addition to
the Cygwin dual architecture builds.  Maybe we'll end up supporting
ARM64 some way down the road and then it's going to be yet another
target again for packagers.


Regards,
Achim.
-- 
+<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+

SD adaptation for Waldorf rackAttack V1.04R1:
http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfSDada