From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: bignum branch Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2018 09:11:49 +0300 Message-ID: <83o9eiu0d6.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87o9fbbw1t.fsf@tromey.com> <86in5jdj49.fsf@gmail.com> <83wotxaiwi.fsf@gnu.org> <86k1pxmvmx.fsf@gmail.com> <87efg4a9xc.fsf@tromey.com> <87a7qr8cz7.fsf@tromey.com> <86tvoy3je9.fsf@gmail.com> <86bmb0vbxf.fsf@gmail.com> <87k1pnfcg1.fsf@tromey.com> <86sh4b1833.fsf@gmail.com> <861sbgz3dm.fsf@gmail.com> <83a7q4ufxp.fsf@gnu.org> <86in4resc8.fsf@gmail.com> <831sbfvl11.fsf@gnu.org> <8636vv7ohh.fsf@gmail.com> <83y3dntwsw.fsf@gnu.org> <83wot7tkdh.fsf@gnu.org> <86efffgr9h.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1533363038 17604 195.159.176.226 (4 Aug 2018 06:10:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2018 06:10:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andy Moreton Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 04 08:10:34 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1flplp-0004Ua-Ik for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 04 Aug 2018 08:10:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54056 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1flpnw-0003gc-5G for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 04 Aug 2018 02:12:44 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48187) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1flpnH-0003gU-1j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Aug 2018 02:12:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1flpnC-00088X-4B for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Aug 2018 02:12:03 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:39857) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1flpnB-00088R-Vy; Sat, 04 Aug 2018 02:11:58 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1827 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1flpnB-00074b-E9; Sat, 04 Aug 2018 02:11:57 -0400 In-reply-to: <86efffgr9h.fsf@gmail.com> (message from Andy Moreton on Fri, 03 Aug 2018 20:54:34 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:228144 Archived-At: > From: Andy Moreton > Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2018 20:54:34 +0100 > > If I apply the following from master to the bignum branch then a 32bit > MinGW build succeeds: > > 024d20f81e ("Fix compilation with mingw.org's MinGW 5.x headers") > bd52f37cae ("Fix last change: only MinGW runtime 5.0.2 and later needs > that.") That's a surprise: I thought MinGW64 uses its own headers for 32-bit builds, whereas the above commits fix problems specific to mingw.org's headers. At the time, I looked at the MinGW64 headers, and my conclusion was that this particular problem doesn't exist there. And the fix is conditioned on __MINGW32_VERSION, which AFAIK doesn't exist in the MinGW64 headers. You did use MinGW64 for the 32-bit build, right? If so, can you help me understand what I am missing here?