From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: oscarfv@telefonica.net (=?UTF-8?Q?=C3=93scar?= Fuentes) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#18699: 25.0.50; Windows 7: Odd length text property list Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 13:46:22 +0200 Message-ID: <8761fojiml.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <87eguclr91.fsf@telefonica.net> <87a950lob5.fsf_-_@wanadoo.es> <8338as8ri7.fsf@gnu.org> <83wq847az4.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1413200969 28943 80.91.229.3 (13 Oct 2014 11:49:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 11:49:29 +0000 (UTC) To: 18699@debbugs.gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 13 13:49:22 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Xde7s-00057G-W8 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Oct 2014 13:49:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33083 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xde7s-0005Kn-Lr for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Oct 2014 07:49:20 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42736) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xde7i-0005KU-Qr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Oct 2014 07:49:18 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xde7b-0000Op-AF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Oct 2014 07:49:10 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:50953) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xde7b-0000Of-6R for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Oct 2014 07:49:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Xde7a-0007W2-Et for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Oct 2014 07:49:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <87eguclr91.fsf@telefonica.net> Resent-From: oscarfv@telefonica.net (=?UTF-8?Q?=C3=93scar?= Fuentes) Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 11:49:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18699 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 18699-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18699.141320089128810 (code B ref 18699); Mon, 13 Oct 2014 11:49:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 18699) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Oct 2014 11:48:11 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42517 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Xde6k-0007Ub-DR for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Oct 2014 07:48:10 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp08.acens.net ([86.109.99.132]:17297 helo=smtp.movistar.es) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Xde6g-0007UR-PZ for 18699@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Oct 2014 07:48:08 -0400 X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A0B020D.543BBBF3.0301, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0 X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown Original-Received: from qcore (79.158.173.198) by smtp.movistar.es (8.6.122.03) (authenticated as 981711563$telefonica.net) id 540881B401260C93; Mon, 13 Oct 2014 11:48:03 +0000 Original-Lines: 22 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-From-Line: nobody Mon Oct 13 13:46:24 2014 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:94458 The MinGW-w64 guys say that _W64 is not the rigth way of checking that we are targeting Windows 64. _WIN64 is. http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/mailman/message/32925577/ AFAIU the fact that we are using _W64 for detecting MinGW-w64 (on both 32 and 64 bit variants) is also wrong. _W64 is a MS thing and not specific to MinGW-w64, as explained on the StackOverflow question linked from the above message. It just happens that MinGW does not define it. The right way to detect MinGW-w64 is to test for __MINGW64_VERSION_MAJOR *after* including some C runtime header or _mingw.h, because it is not a preprocessor predefined macro. It is explained here: http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/discussion/723798/thread/ea355c1f/#d4db I propose to fix the ALIGN_STACK issue by replacing _W64 with _WIN64 and later fix the places where _W64 is used for detecting MinGW-w64 with the right method. Eli, can you take care of the ALIGN_STACK fix? I'll send a patch for the rest of _W64 cases, if nobody beats me to it.