[ccan] [PATCH 0/9] configurator: Support for Windows and MSVC

[Daniel Burke]

I do have a bit of experience with windows/linux C code interop, and while
Visual C++ tends to be somewhat... unpredictable (It's getting much better
than it used to be), I can tell you that...

x86_64-w64-mingw32-gcc

will output binaries that will happily run on windows, so long as you're
using a version at least as new as is provided with Debian Jessie. (the
wheezy version produced broken binaries). Wine can then be used to test
them quite reliably. That compiler comes with enough windows libraries and
headers to do most reasonable jobs, and quite a few unix headers mangled to
work in windows environments.

sudo apt-get install mingw-w64

There's a 32bit version if you're that way inclined (which is also broken
on wheezy), although I haven't used it recently enough to recall it.

regards,

dan
--
"The world is full of magical things patiently waiting for our wits to grow
sharper." - Bertrand Russell

On 20 September 2016 at 21:55, David Gibson <david at gibson.dropbear.id.au>
wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 12:21:25AM -0600, Kevin Locke wrote:
> > Hi David,
> >
> > Thank you for taking the time to review these patches, especially for a
> > platform that you don't have a strong stake in.  I really appreciate it.
> >
> > On 09/19/2016 10:48 PM, David Gibson wrote:
> > > On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 06:51:57PM -0600, Kevin Locke wrote:
> > > > This patch series adds support for building configurator with
> Microsoft
> > > > Visual C++ and running it on Windows.  The motivation is to add
> > > > sufficient support for Windows to allow using header-only modules
> > > > with minimal hassle.  For me, this patch series is sufficient, so I
> > > > don't have any further plans for changes to other files or the build
> > > > system at the moment.
> > >
> > > First, thanks for this.  ccan isn't supposed to be platform specific,
> > > but it kind of is at the moment, simply because most of the
> > > contributions have been from Linux developers.  I'm really happy to
> > > see some work to make it useful on different platforms.
> > >
> > > Second, because I'm not and have never been a Windows dev, my ability
> > > to review these is limited - so I'm inclined to apply anything that
> > > doesn't break builds on Linux / POSIX.
> > >
> > > Third, because most of the main ccan contributors are not Windows
> > > devs, I'm a bit worried about bitrot.  If you can think of any way of
> > > making some kind of automated smoke test form builds on Windows, that
> > > would be terrific.  Otherwise, I guess we'll just hope for the best.
> >
> > I think that's a very legitimate concern.  I'm not a frequent Windows
> > developer myself, but had a need for a current project.  I've tried to
> > minimize the amount of Windows-specific code, with good results I think,
> but
> > that's obviously not much of a guarantee that it won't rot or subtly
> break
> > on Windows going forward.
> >
> > I've seen appveyor.com used quite often for Windows CI, and it is free
> for
> > FOSS projects.  I'd be happy to work up some basic smoke tests if it
> seems
> > like that might be useful and not too much of a maintenance burden.  Let
> me
> > know what you think.
>
> Sounds good to me.
>
> --
> David Gibson                    | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
> david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au  | minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_
> _other_
>                                 | _way_ _around_!
> http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
>
> _______________________________________________
> ccan mailing list
> ccan at lists.ozlabs.org
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/ccan
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/ccan/attachments/20160920/1f04f7c0/attachment.html>