[cfe-dev] Merging MinGW toolchain patches to 3.7

[Hans Wennborg]

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Martell Malone
<martellmalone at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I've merged the requested changes in r243059, r243061, r243063, and
>> r243064.
>
> Great thanks Hans, I'll start testing the branch now :)
>
>
> Any word on r242539  r242540 for compiler-rt ?

Those got merged in r243059.

Some of the original commits were merged together in one go, so the
number of commits to the branch doesn't match the number of commits
merged. Sorry for the confusion.

>
>
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 12:17 AM, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote:
>>
>> I've merged the requested changes in r243059, r243061, r243063, and
>> r243064.
>>
>> Please keep me posted if there are any follow-up commits with tests
>> that should get merged.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Hans
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Richard Smith <metafoo at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Yes, we should get these changes into 3.7. I'll look over the patches
>> >> later today.
>> >
>> > I'm not very happy about applying patches with no tests to the branch,
>> > but,
>> > reluctantly, approved.
>> >
>> > Yaron: please add some tests for r242660 and r242667 to trunk. (I also
>> > find
>> > it very weird that the MinGW::Arch member has a trailing slash. Is there
>> > a
>> > good reason for that?)
>> >>
>> >> On 23 Jul 2015 9:56 am, "Hans Wennborg" <hans at chromium.org> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> +cfe-dev to keep it on the list, and Richard
>> >>>
>> >>> This sounds like a reasonable thing to merge.
>> >>>
>> >>> Richard, what's your opinion as an owner?
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Martell Malone
>> >>> <martellmalone at gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > I almost forgot
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Yaron also fixed all the different combination of linux host/distros
>> >>> > targetting mingw with theses 3.
>> >>> > I have a feeling we will have people hitting the mailing list about
>> >>> > come the
>> >>> > 3.7 release if their distro isn't working.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > clang
>> >>> >
>> >>> > r242660  Support mingw toolchain include and lib directories on Arch
>> >>> > Linux.
>> >>> > r242667  Remove erroneous space in "lib64" string constant.
>> >>> > r242766  Fix mingw toolchain to honor sysroot on Linux and add
>> >>> > tests.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Again as i said I've no idea what the process is or what we can do
>> >>> > here.
>> >>> > Hoping you can fill me in on the details
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Kind Regards
>> >>> > Martell
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 5:44 PM, Martell Malone
>> >>> > <martellmalone at gmail.com>
>>
>> >>>
>> >>> > wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Hi Hans :)
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> rnk and I were talking to me about the possibility of getting the
>> >>> >> mingw
>> >>> >> driver work back ported into the 3.7 branch.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I read the thread where you branched the 3.7 release you said that
>> >>> >> if
>> >>> >> anyone has a request to have patches merged they should contact you
>> >>> >> directly
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> When the branch was made we were in the middle of crushing the
>> >>> >> final
>> >>> >> bugs
>> >>> >> in the MINGW Driver.
>> >>> >> I had a total of about 9 patches merged but 2 missed the window
>> >>> >> unfortunately.
>> >>> >> 1 was for compiler-rt and 1 was for clang
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> clang
>> >>> >> r242905  Add support for -rtlib option and -stdlib option to the
>> >>> >> mingw
>> >>> >> driver
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> compiler-rt
>> >>> >> r242539  compiler-rt: add support for mingw-w64 in builtins
>> >>> >> r242540  Add missing chkstk.S files from r242539
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> (r242540 is here because only half the patch was committed
>> >>> >> initially)
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> These 2(now 3) patches complete my series and fixes everything to
>> >>> >> have
>> >>> >> a
>> >>> >> clang toolchain with mingw-w64 without needing gcc.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I don't know what the process is for back porting or how you feel
>> >>> >> about
>> >>> >> these patches but I said I would email you about it an see where we
>> >>> >> can go
>> >>> >> from here :)
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Kind Regards
>> >>> >> Martell
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>