Re: New comps.xml group for Windows cross-compiler

[Kevin Kofler <kevin kofler chello at>]

Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> I wanted a new name for this project that doesn't involve using
> trademarks and doesn't carry the baggage of "MinGW", and also reflects
> the fact that we might want to broaden support to other non-embedded
> platforms in future.
> 
> So far my best effort was "Consumer cross-compilers" (CCC) or
> "Consumer cross-compiler collection" (CCCC).

What I wonder is: should there not be one group per target operating system?
While I can see the sense of bundling W32 and W64 together (but still
wonder whether users won't prefer them separate), let's assume there was a
legal way to build a cross compiler for OS X (AFAIK, there currently is
none, unless you limit yourself to the base Darwin only): would people
really want to install the MinGW stuff when all they care about is OS X or
the opposite?

        Kevin Kofler