[Mono-dev] compile mono on windows
fk.fuchs at googlemail.com
Sat Apr 30 13:51:32 EDT 2011
nice to see a follow up on this! It's really nice to have someone reproduce what I did ... I didn't find the motivation yet to start from zero again to check or complete my "instructions" (I really spend about a lot of hours over the course of several months trying to get it build, so I don't know if I managed to stay reasonably sane). Of course it would be even more gorgeous if Mingw-w64 (I hope you aim for them, and not the "original" Mingw) and MSys could become one of the officially supported build paths for mono on Windows.
Concerning glib and pkg-config, I needed them to build Mono-2.6.7. For the latest mono at least glib is not required. Actually I first compiled a 2.10.1 build but ended up with runtime errors when I executing an assembly from with an embedded mono (all 64 bit).
Am 30.04.2011 um 17:00 schrieb Jonathan Chambers:
> I did complete a 32-bit runtime build using the MinGW toolchain instead of cygwin. I did this on git master with no changes required. I'm trying a 64-bit built next, and will hopefully make any adjustments needed for a successful 64-bit build.
> The class lib part of the build failed. I think this is due to the absence of cygpath which is used to adjust paths. There were multiple warnings about cygpath missing during the runtime build, but it succeeded anyway. However, the class lib build failed immediately with odd look paths. I'll look into that when I get the chance, hopefully to see what is required to get a full build using MinGW.
> I followed your directions with a few adjustments. I had to install automake, autoconf, and libtool from MSys. I didn't install pkg-config or glib since neither seem needed by the current build in git.
> - Jonathan
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 1:35 AM, Frank Fuchs <fk.fuchs at googlemail.com> wrote:
> The build takes about 10min on a Corei7 desktop machine using a single make thread
> (I did not test parallel make). I don't know how this compares to cywin's build time, sorry.
> My argument against cygwin was the lack of gcc-4.X and the lack of a 64 bit toolchain.
> I don't know if these are actually a valid arguments but I also found cygwin very hard to handle.
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mono-devel-list