I think we need to separate out being able to build for the pc-windows-gnu
target vs. using the entire msys2/mingw64 environment.
We need to continue to be able to build for pc-windows-gnu because the
debugging story with rust+msvc is still not great. We have the beginnings of
local variables
On 2016-09-08 1:32 PM, Lars Bergstrom wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
>>
>> I would favor going the Clang route for supporting building with OSS on
>> Windows. MinGW for better or worse is not just a toolchain: it's a mini
>> UNIX install on your machine. From my exp
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
>
> This is almost certainly doable from the perspective of Firefox's
> automation making those bits available as a side-effect of builds.
I think we would want to make SM-tc(pkg) a static build -- it already is
uploading the (currently
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Lars Bergstrom
wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
> >
> > I would favor going the Clang route for supporting building with OSS on
> > Windows. MinGW for better or worse is not just a toolchain: it's a mini
> > UNIX install on your mach
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Lars Bergstrom
wrote:
> TBH, if SM
> were available as a prebuilt static lib, we'd probably consider just
> using that in the Servo build in order to save a bunch of build time
>
> and avoid the msys2 dependency.
>
This should be possible soon-ish.
My und
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
>
> I would favor going the Clang route for supporting building with OSS on
> Windows. MinGW for better or worse is not just a toolchain: it's a mini
> UNIX install on your machine. From my experience, all that extra surface
> area just introdu
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 8:40 AM, Nathan Froyd wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> > On 08/09/16 16:08, Lars Bergstrom wrote:
> >> That said, I know that there are a few benefits on the mingw side:
> >
> > (4) Build Servo on Windows using only free software?
>
>
It would be nice to do one less set of bindings to need to generate when
doing a smup.
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Lars Bergstrom wrote:
> Now that Vlad has landed the amazing support for compiling with Visual
> C++ instead of the mingw gcc toolchain, I'd like to propose that we
> remove min
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 11:11 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 08/09/16 16:08, Lars Bergstrom wrote:
>> That said, I know that there are a few benefits on the mingw side:
>
> (4) Build Servo on Windows using only free software?
At least for the compiler side of the MSVC build, you can use clan
> Do people have opinions one way or another on this? I'm not dead-set
> on removing it, and could definitely be convinced to just switch the
> default to MSVC and hide the mingw documentation but keep testing it
> if there are compelling reasons to do so.
I'm in favor of removing it, but don't we
Now that Vlad has landed the amazing support for compiling with Visual
C++ instead of the mingw gcc toolchain, I'd like to propose that we
remove mingw from our automation, documentation, and support. There
are a few reasons:
1) Python is a total crazy mess. Users get messed up with the three
(3) d
On 08/09/16 16:08, Lars Bergstrom wrote:
> That said, I know that there are a few benefits on the mingw side:
(4) Build Servo on Windows using only free software?
(Or is that not true?)
Gerv
___
dev-servo mailing list
dev-servo@lists.mozilla.org
ht
12 matches
Mail list logo
