On Mon, Oct 03, 2016, David Wohlferd wrote:
> On 10/2/2016 6:38 PM, JonY wrote:
> >On 10/3/2016 06:37, David Wohlferd wrote:
> >>So, my testing didn't turn up any problems. The patch is pretty
> >>big (1,389,398), so I have compressed it and uploaded it to
>
On 10/2/2016 6:38 PM, JonY wrote:
On 10/3/2016 06:37, David Wohlferd wrote:
So, my testing didn't turn up any problems. The patch is pretty
big (1,389,398), so I have compressed it and uploaded it to
http://www.LimeGreenSocks.com/gen2.7z (where it is only 82,083).
Just a reminder: Despite the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 10/3/2016 06:37, David Wohlferd wrote:
>
> So, my testing didn't turn up any problems. The patch is pretty
> big (1,389,398), so I have compressed it and uploaded it to
> http://www.LimeGreenSocks.com/gen2.7z (where it is only 82,083).
>
>
On 10/1/2016 4:37 PM, David Wohlferd wrote:
> On 9/24/2016 7:23 PM, David Wohlferd wrote:
>> On 9/24/2016 4:55 AM, NightStrike wrote:
>>> On Sep 23, 2016 8:08 PM, "David Wohlferd"
>>> wrote:
Ok. With that change in place, I have run
autoreconf -fiv
On 9/24/2016 7:23 PM, David Wohlferd wrote:
> On 9/24/2016 4:55 AM, NightStrike wrote:
>> On Sep 23, 2016 8:08 PM, "David Wohlferd" wrote:
>>> Ok. With that change in place, I have run
>>>autoreconf -fiv
>>>
>>> in the root directory of mingw-w64. That
On 9/24/2016 4:55 AM, NightStrike wrote:
> On Sep 23, 2016 8:08 PM, "David Wohlferd" wrote:
>> On 9/23/2016 5:08 AM, JonY wrote:
>>> On 9/23/2016 09:50, David Wohlferd wrote:
On 9/22/2016 5:53 AM, JonY wrote:
> On 9/22/2016 20:23, JonY wrote:
>> just remove
On Sep 23, 2016 8:08 PM, "David Wohlferd" wrote:
>
> On 9/23/2016 5:08 AM, JonY wrote:
> > On 9/23/2016 09:50, David Wohlferd wrote:
> >> On 9/22/2016 5:53 AM, JonY wrote:
> >>> On 9/22/2016 20:23, JonY wrote:
> just remove the mpdecimal directory, the dfp/*.c stuff
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 9/23/2016 09:50, David Wohlferd wrote:
> On 9/22/2016 5:53 AM, JonY wrote:
>> On 9/22/2016 20:23, JonY wrote:
>>> just remove the mpdecimal directory, the dfp/*.c stuff should
>>> still work, likewise for the pformat.c changes. I'm doing just
On 9/22/2016 5:53 AM, JonY wrote:
> On 9/22/2016 20:23, JonY wrote:
>> just remove the mpdecimal directory, the dfp/*.c stuff should
>> still work, likewise for the pformat.c changes. I'm doing just that
>> since yesterday, running build tests. SF ate my GPG signed mail.
>>
>> Use format-patch -D
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 9/22/2016 20:23, JonY wrote:
>
> just remove the mpdecimal directory, the dfp/*.c stuff should
> still work, likewise for the pformat.c changes. I'm doing just that
> since yesterday, running build tests. SF ate my GPG signed mail.
>
> Use
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 9/22/2016 07:15, David Wohlferd wrote:
>
> Creating patches that delete files makes for REALLY big patches.
> Instead of me emailing the 8MB file, just pretend that the attached
> file also deletes the entire mingw-w64-crt/math/DFP/mpdecimal
>
On 9/20/2016 3:39 PM, David Wohlferd wrote:
On 9/20/2016 3:01 AM, JonY wrote:
On 9/20/2016 14:29, David Wohlferd wrote:
1) The paths for the math/DFP stuff are totally messed up.
Directory names include a version number (2.3) which our tree has
removed, some directory names have changed
On 9/20/2016 3:01 AM, JonY wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 9/20/2016 14:29, David Wohlferd wrote:
1) The paths for the math/DFP stuff are totally messed up.
Directory names include a version number (2.3) which our tree has
removed, some directory names have changed
On 8/12/2016 5:34 AM, NightStrike wrote:
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 2:05 AM, dw wrote:
I have been told that "autoreconf -fiv" regenerates all the files using
the current version. But after seeing the dozen files it changed and
realizing I didn't actually know what any
>> Since I need to regenerate Makefile.in, I need to decide what to do:
> Make one commit that updates aclocal to v1.15.
Committed and pushed.
> Make a second commit that
> applies your desired changes to both Makefile.am and Makefile.in.
Committed and pushed.
>> Hopefully someone who knows
On Aug 10, 2016 5:44 PM, "dw" wrote:
>
> The checked-in mingw-w64-crt/Makefile.in was generated with 1.15.
> However the associated aclocal.m4 is generated with 1.14.1. I don't
> know much about the build files, but is mixing and matching like this a
> good idea?
Nope
The checked-in mingw-w64-crt/Makefile.in was generated with 1.15.
However the associated aclocal.m4 is generated with 1.14.1. I don't
know much about the build files, but is mixing and matching like this a
good idea?
Since I need to regenerate Makefile.in, I need to decide what to do:
a) I
17 matches
Mail list logo