RE: mingw-w64 build breaks and warnings

2013-11-27 Thread Stephan T. Lavavej
[Paul Smith] > Fixed, thanks. Awesome - I've verified that a4937bc successfully builds and runs for mingw-w64, emitting only the innocuous warnings. Now I don't need local patches, yay! > I didn't change anything for this one. I'll look at it later. Note that all of the "stuff is unused" war

Re: mingw-w64 build breaks and warnings

2013-11-27 Thread Paul Smith
On Tue, 2013-11-26 at 12:21 +, Ray Donnelly wrote: > Instead of adding the MS-specific "%Ix", could you not add (in the > batch file) the define of __MINGW_USE_ANSI_STDIO=1, otherwise I > suspect you'd be breaking people who prefer the stdio a bit more ansi > (mingw-builds for example). I went

Re: mingw-w64 build breaks and warnings

2013-11-27 Thread Paul Smith
On Mon, 2013-11-25 at 19:39 -0800, Stephan T. Lavavej wrote: > #1: >OSN (fatal, NILF, >^ Fixed, thanks. > #2: > w32err.c: In function 'map_windows32_error_to_string': > w32err.c:70:3: warning: passing argument 2 of 'fatal' makes integer from > pointer without a cast [enabl

[bug #40725] Make could completely freeze during a parallel build in some particular conditions

2013-11-27 Thread Florent Viard
URL: Summary: Make could completely freeze during a parallel build in some particular conditions Project: make Submitted by: fviard Submitted on: mer. 27 nov. 2013 19:16:14 GMT Severit

Re: [bug #40639] GNU Make with profiling information

2013-11-27 Thread Tim Murphy
FWIW As for profiling output, this should probably go to a file (possibly with a .PID on the end) , not stdout .unless. you start to embrace the idea of structured output for everything that make produces. I have used XML before and it has advantages, not the least of which is that it is

Re: [bug #40639] GNU Make with profiling information

2013-11-27 Thread Reinier Post
On Wed Nov 27 09:56:55 2013, eddy.petri...@gmail.com (Eddy Petrișor) wrote: > Pe 25.11.2013 11:09, "Reinier Post" a scris: > > > > Can't this functionality be provided by a wrapper $SHELL? > > > > Sure, it's an extra exec(), > > > > but it will keep the make code base simpler. > > > > > > I'm not