On Sun, 31 Jul 2005, Paul Brook wrote:
> The gcc4 changes are a different matter. I discusses this with Fabrice on
> IRC
> shortly after submitting the patch. The patch is pretty invasive, high risk,
> and potentially hard to debug and maintain.
Talking of which, I don't know if I have sent y
> Given that QEMU can support the current release of GCC on Windows by
> changing less than 40 lines of code in one file, can we please begin
> discussing the inclusion of these changes in the main codebase?
> Explicitly specifying this one variable name in a preprocessor directive
> doesn't lo
> I'm not sure what you mean about the patch "not being necessary". I
> haven't tried building with Cygwin, so I can't speak for that platform.
> My build environment is MinGW with the MSYS shell (to avoid onerous
> licensing issues and DLL dependencies), and I can assure that the patch
> very
Christian MICHON wrote:
First rule of (efficient) engineering: <>
for the record: gcc-3.3-x is *fine* and *most* stable,
not just on windows. It's still my reference compiler
even for linux kernels.
Why do you feel it's necessary to upgrade? Because
gcc people do?
Don't get me wrong, Ch
Paul Brook wrote:
"sledgehammer" and "nut" spring to mind :-)
The attached patch is sufficient to get qemu working on win32 when compiled
with gcc3.4. I've successfully booted a knoppix CD inside qemu on a windows
host with this patch.
The problem was that gcc is choosing inconvenient names
First rule of (efficient) engineering: <>
for the record: gcc-3.3-x is *fine* and *most* stable,
not just on windows. It's still my reference compiler
even for linux kernels.
Why do you feel it's necessary to upgrade? Because
gcc people do? There's *no* speed improvement, as
far as I can see (wel
Hi!
Steve D. Perkins wrote:
Paul Brook wrote:
Are you sure you included the correct patch?
I don't see anything win32 specific about this patch. AFAICS it's
just the gcc4 patch *that I wrote* and posed some time ago.
Both cygwin and mingw is still using gcc3.4.x, so it shouldn't be
necessa
Paul Brook wrote:
Are you sure you included the correct patch?
I don't see anything win32 specific about this patch. AFAICS it's just the
gcc4 patch *that I wrote* and posed some time ago.
Both cygwin and mingw is still using gcc3.4.x, so it shouldn't be necessary.
Paul -
Please don'
On Saturday 30 July 2005 19:42, Steve D. Perkins wrote:
> Hello all -
>
> I wrote to the list a few days ago to gauge interest in adding
> support for GCC in the Win32 environment to the QEMU codebase. I
> received no response to that inquiry, but decided to update my patch for
> the 0.7.1 rel
Hello all -
I wrote to the list a few days ago to gauge interest in adding
support for GCC in the Win32 environment to the QEMU codebase. I
received no response to that inquiry, but decided to update my patch for
the 0.7.1 release anyway in hopes that it will be of use to people. The
pat
10 matches
Mail list logo
