On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 7:22 PM Michael Cronenworth <mike@cchtml.com> wrote:

On 8/12/19 9:11 AM, Greg Hellings wrote:
> In 2019, is there any reason to just not ship a 32-bit Windows binary? Does anyone
> still use non-64-bit Windows?

The problem isn't with us or with MinGW. There's still plently of third-party,
closed source 32-bit only applications that require a full 32-bit runtime. It will
be a decade or more before we can finally say goodbye to 32-bit.

@Sandro, I have no hard objection to switching to DW2, but I have no objection
either to dropping the 32-bit package. There shouldn't be many users of rust
requiring 32-bit runtimes.

This is what I meant - not dropping the mingw32 toolchain. Sorry for the confusion.

You have the problem what to do with packages which require rust, currently librsvg2. Without a mingw32-rust, I'd also need to drop mingw32-librsvg2, and all mingw32-* packages depending on it, or split the actual librsvg2 package into a mingw32-librsvg2 package which will stay frozen at version 2.40.19 (resp. the last version prior to rust being required), and a mingw64-librsvg2 which will follow the latest releases. But if more libraries pick up a rust requirement, this may become impractical, for both users and other packages, say for instance if a library interface changes and you'd need to handle the mingw32- and mingw64- case separately in dependent packages.

Sandro