On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Ruben Van Boxem
wrote:
>
> PS: the opinions expressed in this email do not necessarily coincide with
> the opinions of the MinGW-w64 developers, Microsoft, or any other person
> participating in this discussion ;-)
Ha Ha. Ditto that.
--
Earnie
-- https://sites.g
On 11/13/12, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Nov 13 16:32, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Corinna Vinschen
>> wrote:
>>
>> About the correction made in SYSTEM_BASIC_INFORMATION:
>>
>> [...]
>> > Index: winternl.h
>> > ==
On 11/13/2012 21:44, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
> This is a report for the 20121113 mass rebuild of all Fedora MinGW
> packages against Fedora Rawhide and a list of all the changes which have been
> applied since the previous mass rebuild.
>
> During this mass rebuild the followin
On Nov 13 16:32, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
> About the correction made in SYSTEM_BASIC_INFORMATION:
>
> [...]
> > Index: winternl.h
> > ===
> > --- winternl.h (revision 5451)
>
>> It seems therefore that using -finline-functions for heavy-template code
>> is the way to go - I imagine a new section is created for each template
>> instantiation; since most of those functions are small and get only
>> called one or twice (serialization code), they can be effectively
>> inli
2012/11/13 Václav Šmilauer :
>> I will try to do that, thanks for advice. It is a bit tedious, and many
>> templates are declared in headers, so I am not sure how far I will get
>> with that.
> For the record, I compared -Os and -O2 options in gcc - they differ only
> in -fintline-functions (enable
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
About the correction made in SYSTEM_BASIC_INFORMATION:
[...]
> Index: winternl.h
> ===
> --- winternl.h (revision 5451)
> +++ winternl.h (working copy)
> @@ -688,9 +688,9 @@
> I will try to do that, thanks for advice. It is a bit tedious, and many
> templates are declared in headers, so I am not sure how far I will get
> with that.
For the record, I compared -Os and -O2 options in gcc - they differ only
in -fintline-functions (enabled with -Os, disabled with -O2) and
This is a report for the 20121113 mass rebuild of all Fedora MinGW
packages against Fedora Rawhide and a list of all the changes which have been
applied since the previous mass rebuild.
During this mass rebuild the following toolchain was used:
* mingw-w64 20121110 trunk snapshot
* binutils
On Nov 13 13:13, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2012/11/13 Corinna Vinschen :
> > On Nov 13 13:09, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
> >> ... is my point: I don't have an objection againt your correction, I have
> >> an objection against its full form being present in the first place.
> >
> > So you want to keep winternl.h a
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2012/11/13 Corinna Vinschen :
>> On Nov 13 13:09, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Corinna Vinschen
>>> wrote:
>>> > On Nov 13 12:17, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
>>> >> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Corinna Vinschen
>>> >> w
2012/11/13 Earnie Boyd
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Ruben Van Boxem
> wrote:
> > 2012/11/13 Earnie Boyd
> >>
> >> That doesn't address the side-by-side issue where we need a 32bit
> >> executable matching the 64bit executable. What do you propose for
> >> 32bit executable path versus the
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Ruben Van Boxem
wrote:
> 2012/11/13 Earnie Boyd
>>
>> That doesn't address the side-by-side issue where we need a 32bit
>> executable matching the 64bit executable. What do you propose for
>> 32bit executable path versus the 64bit executable path? The reason to
2012/11/13 Earnie Boyd
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Ruben Van Boxem
> wrote:
> > 2012/11/13 Earnie Boyd
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> >> > As I said before ... "you need to add the target-lib/ folder to you
> >> > path".
> >> >
> >>
> >> That is unfriendly
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Ruben Van Boxem
wrote:
> 2012/11/13 Earnie Boyd
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> > As I said before ... "you need to add the target-lib/ folder to you
>> > path".
>> >
>>
>> That is unfriendly to the end-user. Note the discussion deals w
2012/11/13 Earnie Boyd
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> > As I said before ... "you need to add the target-lib/ folder to you
> path".
> >
>
> That is unfriendly to the end-user. Note the discussion deals with
> more than just GCC it is a deployment of the client code using
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> As I said before ... "you need to add the target-lib/ folder to you path".
>
That is unfriendly to the end-user. Note the discussion deals with
more than just GCC it is a deployment of the client code using GCC
that is in discussion. Businesses
2012/11/13 Kai Tietz
> As I said before ... "you need to add the target-lib/ folder to you path".
>
> For the host-binaries in /bin it might be good to have "host" DLLs
> used by it in the same directory. But this is just true for "host" ==
> "target" and if you have just one "target".
>
This i
As I said before ... "you need to add the target-lib/ folder to you path".
For the host-binaries in /bin it might be good to have "host" DLLs
used by it in the same directory. But this is just true for "host" ==
"target" and if you have just one "target".
Regards,
Kai
--
2012/11/13 Earnie Boyd
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> > 2012/11/13 Václav Šmilauer :
> >>
> >>> This is a small question with much more impact as you might expect.
> >>> Old style is to put Runtime-DLL files into bin/ directory. This had
> >>> some advantages as long as yo
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Kai Tietz wrote:
> 2012/11/13 Václav Šmilauer :
>>
>>> This is a small question with much more impact as you might expect.
>>> Old style is to put Runtime-DLL files into bin/ directory. This had
>>> some advantages as long as you just have one target to support, bu
2012/11/13 Corinna Vinschen :
> On Nov 13 13:09, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Corinna Vinschen
>> wrote:
>> > On Nov 13 12:17, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Corinna Vinschen
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > On Nov 13 09:21, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> >> >> Hi
2012/11/13 Václav Šmilauer :
>
>> This is a small question with much more impact as you might expect.
>> Old style is to put Runtime-DLL files into bin/ directory. This had
>> some advantages as long as you just have one target to support, but in
>> general isn't the best solution IMHO.
>> More mo
On Nov 13 13:09, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Nov 13 12:17, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
> >> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Corinna Vinschen
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Nov 13 09:21, Kai Tietz wrote:
> >> >> Hi,78
> >> >>
> >> >> 2012/11/12 Cor
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Nov 13 12:17, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Corinna Vinschen
>> wrote:
>> > On Nov 13 09:21, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> >> Hi,78
>> >>
>> >> 2012/11/12 Corinna Vinschen :
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> > the belo
On Nov 13 18:30, JonY wrote:
> On 11/13/2012 18:01, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Nov 13 09:21, Kai Tietz wrote:
> >> Hi,78
> >>
> >> 2012/11/12 Corinna Vinschen :
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> the below patch fixes the definitions of SYSTEM_BASIC_INFORMATION and
> >>> adds a definition of SYSTEM_
On Nov 13 12:17, Ozkan Sezer wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Corinna Vinschen
> wrote:
> > On Nov 13 09:21, Kai Tietz wrote:
> >> Hi,78
> >>
> >> 2012/11/12 Corinna Vinschen :
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > the below patch fixes the definitions of SYSTEM_BASIC_INFORMATION and
> >> >
On 11/13/2012 18:01, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Nov 13 09:21, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> Hi,78
>>
>> 2012/11/12 Corinna Vinschen :
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> the below patch fixes the definitions of SYSTEM_BASIC_INFORMATION and
>>> adds a definition of SYSTEM_PAGEFILE_INFORMATION and
>>> SystemPagefileInfo
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Nov 13 09:21, Kai Tietz wrote:
>> Hi,78
>>
>> 2012/11/12 Corinna Vinschen :
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > the below patch fixes the definitions of SYSTEM_BASIC_INFORMATION and
>> > adds a definition of SYSTEM_PAGEFILE_INFORMATION and
>> >
On Nov 13 09:21, Kai Tietz wrote:
> Hi,78
>
> 2012/11/12 Corinna Vinschen :
> > Hi,
> >
> > the below patch fixes the definitions of SYSTEM_BASIC_INFORMATION and
> > adds a definition of SYSTEM_PAGEFILE_INFORMATION and
> > SystemPagefileInformation. It also changes the formatting of
> > S
> This is a small question with much more impact as you might expect.
> Old style is to put Runtime-DLL files into bin/ directory. This had
> some advantages as long as you just have one target to support, but in
> general isn't the best solution IMHO.
> More modern gcc installs its runtime-DLL f
Hi,
2012/11/12 Václav Šmilauer :
> Hi there,
>
> I would like to ask what the best/recommended practice for installing
> shared libraries under Windows/mingw is. Qt4 for instance installs DLLs
> to both $PREFIX/bin and $PREFIX/lib. I prefer to install to $PREFIX/lib
> and add it to $PATH (in addit
Hi,78
2012/11/12 Corinna Vinschen :
> Hi,
>
> the below patch fixes the definitions of SYSTEM_BASIC_INFORMATION and
> adds a definition of SYSTEM_PAGEFILE_INFORMATION and
> SystemPagefileInformation. It also changes the formatting of
> SYSTEM_INFORMATION_CLASS to make it a bit more readab
33 matches
Mail list logo
