From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Anyone building Emacs trunk with MinGW w64 (32 bits) Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 16:49:37 +0100 Message-ID: <87vc8im7zi.fsf@wanadoo.es> References: <87zjxumbjf.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83a9pu3zq1.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1364053793 26229 80.91.229.3 (23 Mar 2013 15:49:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 15:49:53 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 23 16:50:19 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1UJQi1-0001I0-S1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 16:50:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49411 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UJQhe-0004Z6-8x for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 11:49:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:47767) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UJQha-0004Yo-D2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 11:49:52 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UJQhZ-0007dK-CY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 11:49:50 -0400 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:54910) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UJQhZ-0007dA-5f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 11:49:49 -0400 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UJQhu-0001F6-R1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 16:50:10 +0100 Original-Received: from 109.red-83-37-167.dynamicip.rima-tde.net ([83.37.167.109]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 16:50:10 +0100 Original-Received: from ofv by 109.red-83-37-167.dynamicip.rima-tde.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 23 Mar 2013 16:50:10 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 26 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 109.red-83-37-167.dynamicip.rima-tde.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:bjSwBnuSrARS/kcsRlG8l11nA4g= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:158081 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > MinGW64 is a different project that MinGW32, developed by different > people. The header files and libraries they provide are indeed > different from the ones provided by MinGW32. If you really want to > use this toolchain, you will have to find out what causes these > problems, and suggest patches to avoid them (we will have to find a > preprocessor symbols to distinguish between MinGW32 and MinGW64 for > that to work). Ok. Indeed, the problem consists on differences in the header files. Seems that MinGW64 is diverging from MinGW at a quick pace. Adapting Emacs to those changes is a recipe for getting even more tangled preprocessor code in Emacs. I'm not sure it is worth the trouble unless MinGW stalls. > Btw, I assume that you use MinGW64 as a cross-compiler to produce a > 32-bit executable, not a 64-bit executable. The latter needs even > more work to build and work. The toolchain I'm using is composed of 32 bit executables that produces 32 bit executables, so no crosscompiling. The `64' in MinGW64 is just an historical artifact, it doesn't mean that the toolchain is restricted to 64 bit hosts.