[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64 |
Date: |
Mon, 17 Nov 2014 18:34:05 +0200 |
> Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 08:03:56 -0800
> From: Paul Eggert <address@hidden>
> CC: address@hidden
>
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Isn't that so in the patch? Which parts of the patch, excluding
> > configure.ac, would you consider not Windows-specific?
>
> Sorry, I didn't read the rest of the patch carefully. If this symbol is
> needed
> only for code specific to that platform I agree that ms-w32.h is a better
> home
> for its definition.
AFAICS, all the suggested changes are in w32-specific files, yes.
- Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, (continued)
- Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, Óscar Fuentes, 2014/11/17
- Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/11/17
- Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, Óscar Fuentes, 2014/11/17
- Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/11/17
- Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, Óscar Fuentes, 2014/11/17
- Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, Glenn Morris, 2014/11/17
- Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, Óscar Fuentes, 2014/11/17
- Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/11/17
- Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/11/17
- Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, Paul Eggert, 2014/11/17
- Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/11/17
- Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, Paul Eggert, 2014/11/17
- Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/11/17
Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, Óscar Fuentes, 2014/11/16
Re: [RFC] Correctly handling MinGW-w64, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/11/17