On 11/28/2012 6:59 AM, js.mdnq wrote:
I'll assume that for future reference the gdc's gcc version must always
must the tdm's version to avoid these types of issues. Please correct me
I'm wrong.
That's correct. At some point, it's possible I may release GDC
standalone from TDM. When that happ
On Wednesday, 28 November 2012 at 07:29:53 UTC, Daniel Green
wrote:
On 11/27/2012 6:37 AM, js.mdnq wrote:
I'm trying to test gdc for Win/x64, I too get the same errors
about
missing dll's.
This was my process:
1. Install tdm64-gcc-4.7.1-3.exe
2. Extract gcc-4.6.1-tdm64-1-gdc-20121117-D2.060.7
On 11/27/2012 6:37 AM, js.mdnq wrote:
I'm trying to test gdc for Win/x64, I too get the same errors about
missing dll's.
This was my process:
1. Install tdm64-gcc-4.7.1-3.exe
2. Extract gcc-4.6.1-tdm64-1-gdc-20121117-D2.060.7z to the MinGW64
install dir.
You will need to use the gcc-4.6.1 ver
I'm trying to test gdc for Win/x64, I too get the same errors
about missing dll's.
This was my process:
1. Install tdm64-gcc-4.7.1-3.exe
2. Extract gcc-4.6.1-tdm64-1-gdc-20121117-D2.060.7z to the
MinGW64 install dir.
Tried running gdc.exe and x86_64-w64-mingw32-gdc.exe and both
complain abo
On 3/25/2012 5:10 AM, Manu wrote:
Are there work arounds if I should happen to run in to this? GDC is
currently the only win64 compiler. I'm putting a lot of faith it in for
the time being.
Until it's found why it happens, I can't say how to avoid it. Roughly I
think it may be related to the
On 25 March 2012 05:55, Daniel Green wrote:
> On 3/24/2012 8:35 PM, Manu wrote:
> > Cheers for the info. Here's hoping the release works out well.
> > What instabilities are you primarily concerned about with the existing
> > release? I've been using it for a couple of weeks, and had no problems.
On 3/24/2012 8:35 PM, Manu wrote:
> Cheers for the info. Here's hoping the release works out well.
> What instabilities are you primarily concerned about with the existing
> release? I've been using it for a couple of weeks, and had no problems.
> Are there particular things you anticipate causing
On 25 March 2012 01:34, Daniel Green wrote:
> First, I want apologize. For the lack of a responses lately and because I
> didn't include installation instructions in the latest release notices, but
> they are still included in the readme that comes in every release.
>
> Second, I'd like to offer
First, I want apologize. For the lack of a responses lately and because
I didn't include installation instructions in the latest release
notices, but they are still included in the readme that comes in every
release.
Second, I'd like to offer some background on why I chose the method of
dist
On 20 March 2012 19:48, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 3/20/12, Andrew Wiley wrote:
> > I'm not really sure why Daniel isn't just zipping the full install so
> > you don't have to download TDM GCC separately. Might be some licensing
> > issue there or something.
>
> I think it's fine the way it is.
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Andrej Mitrovic
wrote:
> On 3/20/12, Andrew Wiley wrote:
>> I'm not really sure why Daniel isn't just zipping the full install so
>> you don't have to download TDM GCC separately. Might be some licensing
>> issue there or something.
>
> I think it's fine the way
On 3/20/12, Andrew Wiley wrote:
> I'm not really sure why Daniel isn't just zipping the full install so
> you don't have to download TDM GCC separately. Might be some licensing
> issue there or something.
I think it's fine the way it is. When GDC gets merged with the GCC
mainline we will probably
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 2:43 AM, Manu wrote:
> On 20 March 2012 07:40, Andrew Wiley wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:34 AM, Kapps wrote:
>> > On Monday, 19 March 2012 at 10:57:13 UTC, Manu wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 19 March 2012 10:59, Manu wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On 17 March 2012 21:37, Andrej
On 20 March 2012 07:40, Andrew Wiley wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:34 AM, Kapps wrote:
> > On Monday, 19 March 2012 at 10:57:13 UTC, Manu wrote:
> >>
> >> On 19 March 2012 10:59, Manu wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 17 March 2012 21:37, Andrej Mitrovic
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> On 3/17/12, Manu wro
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 12:34 AM, Kapps wrote:
> On Monday, 19 March 2012 at 10:57:13 UTC, Manu wrote:
>>
>> On 19 March 2012 10:59, Manu wrote:
>>
>>> On 17 March 2012 21:37, Andrej Mitrovic
>>> wrote:
>>>
On 3/17/12, Manu wrote:
> Did find that one, but now missing libppl_c-4.dll
>>>
On Monday, 19 March 2012 at 10:57:13 UTC, Manu wrote:
On 19 March 2012 10:59, Manu wrote:
On 17 March 2012 21:37, Andrej Mitrovic
wrote:
On 3/17/12, Manu wrote:
> Did find that one, but now missing libppl_c-4.dll
> This is a bit silly. A binary toolchain needs to have these
> in the
arch
On 19 March 2012 10:59, Manu wrote:
> On 17 March 2012 21:37, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>
>> On 3/17/12, Manu wrote:
>> > Did find that one, but now missing libppl_c-4.dll
>> > This is a bit silly. A binary toolchain needs to have these in the
>> archive.
>> > No point if you can't run it.
>>
>> I
On 17 March 2012 21:37, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 3/17/12, Manu wrote:
> > Did find that one, but now missing libppl_c-4.dll
> > This is a bit silly. A binary toolchain needs to have these in the
> archive.
> > No point if you can't run it.
>
> I think I've had the same issues before because I
On 3/17/12, Manu wrote:
> Did find that one, but now missing libppl_c-4.dll
> This is a bit silly. A binary toolchain needs to have these in the archive.
> No point if you can't run it.
I think I've had the same issues before because I've installed TDM x86
instead of the TDM x64 (labeled "experim
Did find that one, but now missing libppl_c-4.dll
This is a bit silly. A binary toolchain needs to have these in the archive.
No point if you can't run it.
On 16 March 2012 13:39, Manu wrote:
> I don't have libgmp-3.dll, and every attempt I make to get it results in
> what would seem to be an in
I don't have libgmp-3.dll, and every attempt I make to get it results in
what would seem to be an incompatible version of the DLL, producing the
message: "The procedure entry point __gmp_get_memory_functions could not be
located..."
The version of gmp distributed with the current version of mingw i
21 matches
Mail list logo
