On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 04:53, Peter Bex wrote: > On Fri, Aug 07, 2015 at 09:54:22AM +0200, Christian Kellermann wrote: > > * Claude Marinier [150806 20:15]: > > > Note that I did not have this problem with the release candidates. > > > > Could you try with them again and tell me exactly which one worked? > > Because there are no differences that touch code between the rc4 and > > the 4.10.0 version in git. If there are differences in behaviour for > > you this could mean we shipped a rc with broken pregenerated C code > > for whatever reason and I'd like to investigate that. > > I agree, this is somewhat worrying. > > One problem with MINGW is that it's badly maintained (unless I'm > mistaken, the most recent binary release is from 2013). Mingw-w64 > is better maintained, and despite the name it also works on 32 bit > systems. I think it does support getc_unlocked. You can find it > here: http://mingw-w64.org
Hi, Building both 4.10.0 and rc4 with the MinGW installation on the Windows 7 64-bit PC at work produces the same error : undefined reference to `getc_unlocked'. This was from a "DOS box" (clink) without MSYS. Building on rc4 on the same PC with mingw-w64 works without error (also without MSYS). Check works as expected as does numbers egg installation. I have had problems with MinGW and re-installed a couple of times. I am growing less confident in these installations. This is a good time to move to mingw-w64; I will try it at home later today. Is it useful to dig deeper into the problem with the old MinGW or should I just drop it? Thanks. -- Claude Marinier
_______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
