[Gc] Win64 GCC support
urkedal at nbi.dk
Sun Jun 21 07:47:47 PDT 2009
On 2009-06-21, NightStrike wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 3:00 AM, Petter Urkedal<urkedal at nbi.dk> wrote:
> > On 2009-06-20, NightStrike wrote:
> >> 2009/6/19 Ivan Maidanski <ivmai at mail.ru>:
> >> > Are there any volunteers to get configure up-to-date and working on GNU/Win32 systems?
> >> You guys are using automake, so it should be very easy to do this.
> >> Unfortunately, it appears to be an old version of automake, one that
> >> I've never even used before. Are you averse to stepping up to a more
> >> recent version? 1.11 is current.
> > I normally refresh the generated files with "autoreconf -vif" when
> > building from CVS, and the current HEAD works for me with Automake-1.10.
> > There is, however, a number of warnings which can be silenced by
> > removing the outdated libtool.m4. I've suggested a pending correction
> > (the last two posts):
> The first line of Makefile.in is:
> # Makefile.in generated by automake 1.9.6 from Makefile.am.
> So it must not have been committed if you built it from 1.10.
That's correct. I don't commit access, as I'm just a random follower of
> > https://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.programming.garbage-collection.boehmgc/day=20090516
> > Your seem to be familiar with Automake, so you probably know what to do,
> > but since bdwgc takes a mostly architecture-based approach, my bet is:
> > * Check how ./config.guess identifies the platform.
> > * Add a $host case in configure.ac.
> > * Add the corresponding AC_DEFINEs.
> Going the AC_DEFINE route suggests that configure will handle the
> definitions and put the #defines in config.h. However, you guys don't
> use config.h. Do you instead use the DEFS variable, or something?
> This would also fall into autoconf realm, which is in a weird state.
> You seem to be generating configure with 2.61, but you have 2.53
> listed in your PREREQ line:
> # Generated by GNU Autoconf 2.61 for gc 7.2alpha3.
AC_PREREQ gives is the minimum version which the configure.ac script
should work with, so if someone patches the sources and needs to
regenerate it should be sufficient to use Autoconf 2.53. That doesn't
mean the CVS version of configure needs to be built width that version.
(I don't think files which are generated with tools which are commonly
available to developers should be in CVS at all, but people different
opinions on that point.)
> > Doing this, it's unlikely that you'll introduce anything that doesn't
> > also work on older Automake. I don't have a Windows machine, so I'll
> > have to pass on the actual work.
> I can do the work, as it should be very easy. It's just that I want
> to be clear how you guys want it done. Going the AC_DEFINE route is
> handling it all at configure time instead of make time. Both work
> fine, just tell me which to do and I'll do it.
Good point. If I remember correctly, there is a preference for putting
as much as possible directly into the headers. That is,
gc_config_macros.h if needed by public headers and gcconfig.h otherwise.
Though, my answer is not authoritative. We may still want the $host
case, at least for the moment.
More information about the Gc