Re: [Mingw-cross-env-list] Static vs. shared Qt

[Bart van Andel]

On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Mark Brand <address@hidden> wrote:

The first question is how to encode this in the TARGET - as
a second vendor, or as a suffix to "mingw32", or whatever?

The second question is whether that additional TARGET is
worth the additional maintainance overhead. For instance,
what about win32/win64/osx all in combination with
static/shared? That might become huge, especially if we
need separate build rules for each of these 6 variants.

Also, I wonder whether it really makes sense to build
shared libraries via mingw-cross-env, given the already
existing projects which seem to do the trick as well:

    http://mingw-cross-env.nongnu.org/#see-also
    http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/windows:/mingw:/win32/SLE_11/noarch/
    https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/list/**mingw**

That's why I'd like to head some opinions on that.

The unique thing about mingw-cross-env that I really like is that it's not concerned at all about packaging. This makes it very transparent, lightweight and easy to configure, update and experiment with. No package repositories, RPMs, manifests, etc to mess around with. If I were to start needing shared libraries, I think I would prefer a system like mingw-cross-env's.

Exactly my thoughts. Plus I consider having just 1 system which can do both (static / shared, or even a mixed approach) a plus over needing 2 separate systems.

--

Bart