Re: [Mingw-w64-public] recommended LIBRARY_PATH usage?

[Jon <jon...@gm...>]

> > Is LIBRARY_PATH ignored in my case because i686-w64-mingw32-gcc.exe thinks it's cross-compiling between i686-w64-mingw32 and i686-pc-mingw32?  My understanding is LIBRARY_PATH is ignored when cross-compiling but not other cases, and I want to make sure I get this issue before moving on.
> > 
> 
> No, the compiler doesn't work that way.
> 
> The compiler you are using IS BUILT as a cross compiler, so it IS a
> cross compiler. Using autotools has nothing to do with it.


Don't take this as beating a dead horse.  I simply want to be clear on how you're building these toolchains so I use them as you plan to build/support them.

I downloaded the "1.0 flavor" of mingw-w32-1.0-bin_i686-mingw_20110422.zip which uses 4.5.3.  It acted like a cross-compiler and didn't recognize LIBRARY_PATH.  Not a real problem as I simply switched to using CPATH, PATH, and LDFLAGS and stopped using LIBRARY_PATH.  Things are great except for problems building OpenSSL :(

However, I was a bit surprised when you said it's built as cross-compiler since, from my perspective, it's effectively a mingw32 flavored compiler targeting mingw32.

Additionally, a friend that used the "non-1.0" (4.7.0-based snapshot) flavor claims the compiler honors LIBRARY_PATH. The key difference is that he manually removed the name prefixing from the executables before using rather than polluting the environment as I did.

I haven't yet been able to verify that the non-1.0 (4.7.0) compilers honor LIBRARY_PATH while the 1.0 (4.5.3) compilers don't honor LIBRARY_PATH, but it's next on my list.

Would you summarize how you expect the versioned (1.0, etc) automated builds and the non-versioned automated snapshot builds should behave wrt LIBRARY_PATH?  Also, please explain why they're being built as cross-compilers as I'm not yet clear why they should be cross-compilers.

Thanks in advance for your time on this.

Jon