On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 8:22 AM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
>
>> See
>> http://mingw-w64.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/mingw-w64/experimental/ddk_test/
>> I'd say take
>> http://mingw-w64.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/mingw-w64/experimental/ddk_test/include
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
> See
> http://mingw-w64.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/mingw-w64/experimental/ddk_test/
> I'd say take
> http://mingw-w64.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/mingw-w64/experimental/ddk_test/include/ddk/
> from there and put it into its exclusive directory l
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:13 AM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 11:13 PM, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 6:02 PM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
I am not using the ddk from mingw.org. I am using the TDM64 version.
I believe the ddk inside TDM64 is from the svn version.
On 9/8/2010 10:26, Nils Woetzel wrote:
> wanted to contribute to the multilib cross compiler issue. I just
> joined the list to share my solution to the problem of a failed build
> for the gcc stage 2 - and hopefully the documentation/Makefile can be
> adjusted.
>
> My procedure for building the cr
wanted to contribute to the multilib cross compiler issue. I just
joined the list to share my solution to the problem of a failed build
for the gcc stage 2 - and hopefully the documentation/Makefile can be
adjusted.
My procedure for building the cross compiler pretty much follows the
documentation
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 11:13 PM, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 6:02 PM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>>> I am not using the ddk from mingw.org. I am using the TDM64 version.
>>> I believe the ddk inside TDM64 is from the svn version.
>>
>
> The order here is wrong. It should be
>
> #include
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 6:02 PM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 10:44 PM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 9:58 PM, JonY wrote:
>>> Please do not use the ddk from mingw.org, use the ones from svn instead.
>>>
>>> The ddk headers in use by mingw-w64 is from ReactOS, you
On 9/7/2010 22:07, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 4:18 PM, JonY wrote:
>> On 9/7/2010 21:01, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>>> 2010/9/7 Xiaofan Chen:
Latest libusb-win32 svn (SVN 343)
http://libusb-win32.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/libusb-win32/branches/libusb-testing/
Latest
On 9/7/2010 21:48, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 9:18 PM, JonY wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I assume this is a 32bit build with mingw-w64.
>>
>> -mno-cygwin option is unsupported at all on win64, and soon to be removed
>> even on 32bit target.
>
> Yes we can remove that. This is for the Cygw
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 9:58 PM, JonY wrote:
> Please do not use the ddk from mingw.org, use the ones from svn instead.
>
> The ddk headers in use by mingw-w64 is from ReactOS, you could say they are
> more complete.
I am not using the ddk from mingw.org. I am using the TDM64 version.
I believe th
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 4:18 PM, JonY wrote:
> On 9/7/2010 21:01, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> 2010/9/7 Xiaofan Chen:
>>> Latest libusb-win32 svn (SVN 343)
>>> http://libusb-win32.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/libusb-win32/branches/libusb-testing/
>>>
>>> Latest TDM64, 64bit build, under Windows 7 32bit. Th
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2010/9/7 Ozkan Sezer :
>> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 3:27 PM, John E. / TDM wrote:
>>> On 9/7/2010 1:14 AM, Bidski wrote:
Not to seem impatient or anything, but when will TDM64 be updated with
this? If it is not going to be anytime soon ca
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 9:18 PM, JonY wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I assume this is a 32bit build with mingw-w64.
>
> -mno-cygwin option is unsupported at all on win64, and soon to be removed
> even on 32bit target.
Yes we can remove that. This is for the Cygwin.
> -DWINVER=0x500 does not work on mingw-w64,
On 9/7/2010 21:01, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> 2010/9/7 Xiaofan Chen:
>> Latest libusb-win32 svn (SVN 343)
>> http://libusb-win32.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/libusb-win32/branches/libusb-testing/
>>
>> Latest TDM64, 64bit build, under Windows 7 32bit. The other binary download
>> does
>> not seem to have
2010/9/7 Ozkan Sezer :
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 3:27 PM, John E. / TDM wrote:
>> On 9/7/2010 1:14 AM, Bidski wrote:
>>> Not to seem impatient or anything, but when will TDM64 be updated with
>>> this? If it is not going to be anytime soon can someone provide me
>>> with a patched header/library?
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 3:27 PM, John E. / TDM wrote:
> On 9/7/2010 1:14 AM, Bidski wrote:
>> Not to seem impatient or anything, but when will TDM64 be updated with
>> this? If it is not going to be anytime soon can someone provide me
>> with a patched header/library?
>
> I am able to build wxWidg
On 9/7/2010 1:14 AM, Bidski wrote:
> Not to seem impatient or anything, but when will TDM64 be updated with
> this? If it is not going to be anytime soon can someone provide me
> with a patched header/library?
I am able to build wxWidgets 2.9.1 and wxWidgets SVN trunk with a single
one-line p
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 10:36 AM, JonY wrote:
>>
>> Ok, to clear everything up, for non-multilib 4.6, you should only have
>> "lib", "lib64" only if you have non-multilib 4.5.
>>
>
> It seems the latest automatic build version still has the sam
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 10:36 AM, JonY wrote:
>
> Ok, to clear everything up, for non-multilib 4.6, you should only have
> "lib", "lib64" only if you have non-multilib 4.5.
>
It seems the latest automatic build version still has the same issue
as previous versions, I just checked the following one
On 9/7/2010 15:20, Mario Emmenlauer wrote:
>> On 9/7/2010 01:34, Mario Emmenlauer wrote:
>>> On 09/06/2010 04:52 PM, JonY wrote:
On 9/6/2010 19:50, Mario Emmenlauer wrote:
>> On 9/6/2010 15:52, Mario Emmenlauer wrote:
>>> I'm the original author of the issue [0] that Ismail referenced.
> On 9/7/2010 01:34, Mario Emmenlauer wrote:
>> On 09/06/2010 04:52 PM, JonY wrote:
>>> On 9/6/2010 19:50, Mario Emmenlauer wrote:
> On 9/6/2010 15:52, Mario Emmenlauer wrote:
>> I'm the original author of the issue [0] that Ismail referenced.
>> During
>> the last months since my r
Not to seem impatient or anything, but when will TDM64 be updated with this?
If it is not going to be anytime soon can someone provide me with a patched
header/library?
Regards
Bidski
--
This SF.net Dev2Dev email is
22 matches
Mail list logo
