MinGW patches

[Ludovic Courtès]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> skribis:

>> From: address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès)
>> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>, address@hidden, address@hidden
>> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 12:20:39 +0100
>> 
>> Doug Evans <address@hidden> skribis:
>> 
>> I don’t remember, Eli: do you have patches pending review for these
>> issues and other MinGW issues in Guile?
>
> I don't know, you tell me.  I sent several changesets in June,
> in these messages:
>
>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-user/2013-06/msg00031.html

Already applied.

>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-user/2013-06/msg00032.html

Already applied.

>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-user/2013-06/msg00033.html

open-process without fork, see below.

>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-user/2013-06/msg00036.html

Already applied.

>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-user/2013-06/msg00037.html

What about exposing %shell-command-name and %shell-command-switch as you
suggested back then, and using that in popen.scm?

>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-user/2013-06/msg00039.html

h_error, see below.

> In this message:
>
>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-user/2013-06/msg00057.html
>
> you have requested a copyright assignment for applying my patches;
> that paperwork was done long ago, so the changes can be admitted.

Yes, modulo the comments in that message: commenting where it is due,
and moving the MinGW-specific code to its own function.

Could you resubmit this patch in ‘git format-patch’ format, with a
ChangeLog-style commit log, and in a separate message?

For convenience and to hopefully smooth the process, I’ve added you to
the Savannah group.  Please post here for review before pushing.

> I don't know if they were, though.  One thing I do know is that the
> request to gnulib maintainers to include hstrerror, which I posted, at
> your request, here
>
>   http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2013-06/msg00042.html
>
> was left without any followups.

Could you ping them again?

It would be really ideal for this to go into Gnulib, rather than
duplicating it in each project.

> Also, since the only way I could get a functional MinGW Guile was to
> configure it without threads, I would suggest that this be the default
> for MinGW, but that isn't a big deal.

Is it something that can fixed?  Does libgc pass its tests on MinGW?

Please use one thread per patch, so that the discussion remains focused.

Thanks for persevering, and sorry again for dropping the ball!

Ludo’.