On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Kai Tietz <[email protected]> wrote: > 2011/11/13 Ozkan Sezer <[email protected]>: >> On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Kai Tietz <[email protected]> wrote: >>> 2011/11/13 Ozkan Sezer <[email protected]>: >>>> On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Kai Tietz <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> 2011/11/13 Ozkan Sezer <[email protected]>: >>>>>> [...] >>>>>>> Ozkan, I would like to see the changes done to stdio.h, wchar.h (and >>>>>>> related _mingw_print_(push/pop).h on stable v2 branch, too. They are >>>>>>> fixing an issue we have with libstdc++, as without this patch >>>>>>> input/output stream of 'long double' types won't work. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> Kai >>>>>> >>>>>> Done: Please make sure that I didn't screw-up anything. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regarding backports: >>>>>> >>>>>> - Do we want the _mingw_print_push.h, _mingw_print_pop.h, stdio.h and >>>>>> wchar.h changes in v1.x? >>>>> >>>>> Well, I would say no. But of course it is up to you. It fixes an >>>>> issue in for libstdc++, so it might be seen as bugfix. >>>>> >>>>>> - Do we want r4591 in v2.x and/or v1.x? >>>>> >>>>> Well, for v2 I think it make sense. >>>> >>>> OK >>>> >>>>> For v1.x not sure. >>>>> Btw how long >>>>> we want to keep branch v1.x maintained? >>>> >>>> I'm merging obvious + bugfixes-only. For how long, well, until I get >>>> bored (and I am beginning to :) >>>> >>>> So, I'd like an admin decision: are the stdio and/or *.def/assert >>>> thingies eligible for v1? >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Kai >>>> >>>> -- >>>> O.S. >>> >>> So, the *.def changes for _assert/_wassert are somthing important for >>> v2.0 and for v1.0. The avoid a multiple definition link failure in >>> some cases. >>> >>> The stdio changes are important for working 'long double' >>> stream-input/output for libstdc++. So I see it as important for v2.x, >>> and dependent to live-time of v1 also for it. >> >> Eh-hmm, hummm... You had to answer politically, hadn't you :)) > > :) > >> Will merge the assert stuff to v1 right away. stdio stuff will require >> following the changes and applying manually, but I'll do it. >> >>> >>> Kai > > Well, my question is here if 1.0 has at all the wscanf/wprintf/and > scanf support for POSIX. If not, patches would need to be adjusted, or > the missing functions need to be ported to v1.0.
Printf yes. Scanf, no v1 doesn't have them. My initial thought was making v1 to behave properly without adding the new functions, but I _can_ add the neww stuff too, if you want. > > Kai > -- O.S. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ RSA(R) Conference 2012 Save $700 by Nov 18 Register now http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1 _______________________________________________ Mingw-w64-public mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
