From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn?= Steinbrink Subject: Re: Missing pieces for 1.6.0 on MinGW? Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2008 12:10:44 +0200 Message-ID: <20080803101044.GA32565@atjola.homenet> References: <7vljzfkzkv.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <1217754985.4895776973fda@webmail.nextra.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Junio C Hamano , Steffen Prohaska , Johannes Schindelin , git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Sixt X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Aug 03 12:12:00 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KPaZ4-0000VI-97 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 03 Aug 2008 12:11:50 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752132AbYHCKKt convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Aug 2008 06:10:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752090AbYHCKKt (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Aug 2008 06:10:49 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:59069 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752001AbYHCKKs (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Aug 2008 06:10:48 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 03 Aug 2008 10:10:46 -0000 Received: from i577BB3F8.versanet.de (EHLO atjola.local) [87.123.179.248] by mail.gmx.net (mp033) with SMTP; 03 Aug 2008 12:10:46 +0200 X-Authenticated: #5039886 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19U6BoVvX5UTAqGjF3BZGwpbgzsOmgjTlTCRXwztC qELdyVxUwZvKX4 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1217754985.4895776973fda@webmail.nextra.at> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.66 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 2008.08.03 11:16:25 +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote: > (3) the 'mingw_main undefined' error is still a mystery. I'm about to= send a > preprocessed file to Steffen (it's a bit large, even compressed, so I= 'll do > that in a private mail). =46WIW, gcc 4.3 complains about such function declarations: x.c:4: error: invalid storage class for function =E2=80=98foo=E2=80=99 Seems that gcc complains about that since 4.0, and linking failed with older versions under some circumstances. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D12738 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D17205 Bj=C3=B6rn