[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: cross building 1.9.14 for mingw
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
Re: cross building 1.9.14 for mingw |
Date: |
Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:44:13 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) |
Hi Jan,
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> writes:
> Ludovic Courtès schreef op za 29-01-2011 om 22:34 [+0100]:
[...]
>> Hmm could it be that there was a typo? Here running ‘git-version-gen’
>> outside of a Git tree works fine:
>>
>> $ guile/build-aux/git-version-gen .tarball-version s/foo/bar/
>> UNKNOWN
>
> Yes, does it also work when you change configure.ac and autoreconf?
Well yes?
>> > --- a/libguile/bdw-gc.h
>> > +++ b/libguile/bdw-gc.h
>> > @@ -30,7 +30,9 @@
>> > allocation. */
>> >
>> > # define GC_THREADS 1
>> > +#ifndef __MINGW32__
>> > # define GC_REDIRECT_TO_LOCAL 1
>> > +#endif /* __MINGW32__ */
>>
>> Why?
>
> I'm using gc-6.8
Please use GC 7.x; older versions aren’t supported.
>> > - buf->st_mode = _S_IFSOCK | _S_IREAD | _S_IWRITE | _S_IEXEC;
>> > + buf->st_mode = _S_IREAD | _S_IWRITE | _S_IEXEC;
>>
>> Why? Isn’t ‘_S_IFSOCK’ defined on all MinGW?
>
> I don't have in it my mingw-runtime-3.14. If there's a newer version,
> I've misses something and would like to hear it.
I don’t know. I’m asking because this bit is specifically in an #ifdef
__MINGW32__.
>> > +#ifndef __MINGW32__
>> > /* Make sure the `AI_*' flags can be stored as INUMs. */
>> > verify (SCM_I_INUM (SCM_I_MAKINUM (AI_ALL)) == AI_ALL);
>>
>> Does MinGW lack getaddrinfo?
>
> No, it lacks the AI_* definitions.
Oh fun. And how’s this supposed to be used? :-)
> I realise that you may not want to include this just yet, although it
> "documents" my progress building it for mingw.
Yes, sure.
Thanks,
Ludo’.
- cross building 1.9.14 for mingw, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2011/01/29
- Re: Relocatable installation, Ludovic Courtès, 2011/01/31
- Re: Relocatable installation, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2011/01/31
- Re: Relocatable installation, Ludovic Courtès, 2011/01/31
- Re: Relocatable installation, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2011/01/31