From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FAB6431FBF for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 13:08:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.799 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=disabled Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5nz-4MeAnQHY for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 13:08:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ee0-f43.google.com (mail-ee0-f43.google.com [74.125.83.43]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA6E4431FAE for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 13:08:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ee0-f43.google.com with SMTP id e52so1382968eek.16 for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 13:08:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=date:message-id:from:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version :content-type; bh=B2T52biqoD7CGdXMhWDLFDnpgdFP/XeqxTpjoNuS8Oo=; b=zzTNFmqEiN5ux8dhb60M+VXByfNurJZtYSAUeIvzTG/t1yuRzMA7Ub3TmAMyHgjHtB fBqhcQAYei/U4Lu3Ql7GifHEqOcAo60hpveZA6orGog6S1eZaLHIPbvPPI5bFaQrB6YE ym9uB74VQ7LetyS3Jb/WPEBzC0Lw467jrdGgHkb/Jt2Tku7cSRR0PpMslnRI+q3w15iF hBNY47Qje/L3l0yR6VE0WmCqLIPFvBVV9RsFb/WVXVl5+0wy4AQkUK7+v99OSzRmS2la h0AuKnE1gZhAXRE1v55KIQQES8pj2anXuagC+30SGsfzfYD3j+ZOd8Iie5oLsqjJtfeW 4GEg== X-Received: by 10.14.251.76 with SMTP id a52mr5667012ees.76.1382040179559; Thu, 17 Oct 2013 13:02:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from linux.localdomain.de (95-91-252-230-dynip.superkabel.de. [95.91.252.230]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id f49sm197084418eec.7.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 17 Oct 2013 13:02:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 22:02:50 +0200 Message-ID: <87mwm71x91.wl%claudio.bley@gmail.com> From: Claudio Bley To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: notmuch on w32 User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL/10.8 Emacs/24.3 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 00:46:37 -0700 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 20:08:50 -0000 Hi. I wanted to use notmuch on MS Windows and thus have ported the code to be able to compile with MinGW and MSYS using the GNU autotools on that platform. Now, I'm in the process of streamlining the patches. As a first prerequisite I integrated gnulib as a git submodule and added the Makefile.am and configure.ac stuff. Bootstrapping works OK, basically overwriting the existing Makefiles. So, up to this point, it would be possible to use the old Makefiles as well as the autotools generated ones (allowing cross compilation and out-of-source builds) alternatively. The next step would be ensuring to include config.h as the first header in every compilation unit. Furthermore, I'd need to replace compat.h because that's what gnulib is used for. My question is: would it hurt your feelings if I'd rip off the old build system completely and substitute it with an autotools build? Or, are there any complications / problems I do not yet see? Supporting two build system in parallel definitely is more work, but it would be possible if feasible in some way. Thanks for any opinions. Regards, Claudio --