On Friday 16 April 2010 01:50:24 Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 2:16 AM, Dan Fandrich d...@coneharvesters.com
wrote:
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 10:02:20PM +0200, Nguy�n Thái Ng�c Duy wrote:
+ifeq ($(CONFIG_TARGET_WIN32),y)
Many parts of this patch series depend on
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 8:30 AM, Rob Landley r...@landley.net wrote:
On Friday 16 April 2010 01:50:24 Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 2:16 AM, Dan Fandrich d...@coneharvesters.com
wrote:
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 10:02:20PM +0200, Nguy�n Thái Ng�c Duy wrote:
+ifeq
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 2:16 AM, Dan Fandrich d...@coneharvesters.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 10:02:20PM +0200, Nguy�n Thái Ng�c Duy wrote:
+ifeq ($(CONFIG_TARGET_WIN32),y)
Many parts of this patch series depend on CONFIG_TARGET_WIN32. But it seems
many instances are really
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy pclo...@gmail.com
---
Makefile |1 +
Makefile.flags |6 ++
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index a40be79..9648604 100644
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -481,6 +481,7 @@ libs-y := \
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 10:02:20PM +0200, Nguy�n Thái Ng�c Duy wrote:
+ifeq ($(CONFIG_TARGET_WIN32),y)
Many parts of this patch series depend on CONFIG_TARGET_WIN32. But it seems
many instances are really specific to MingW32 rather than generically Win32.
If someone later does a Cygwin
