Re: mingw 64 build

The attached patch allows building a 64 bit Windows Postgres using the
mingw64 compiler from
<http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw-w64/files/Toolchains%20targetting%20Win64/Automated%20Builds/>.
It works both as a native compiler and for cross-compiling (which I
tested on 32 bit Windows, but could in theory be done on any of the
supported hosts, including Linux, Darwin and Cygwin).

The required changes are very modest, and I'd like to commit this so we
can get some buildfarm coverage (I don't have an available 64 bit
Windows machine for running a buildfarm member right now. but maybe
someone else does.)

There will be some small consequent documentation changes.

cheers

andrew

On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 16:47, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>
> The attached patch allows building a 64 bit Windows Postgres using the
> mingw64 compiler from
> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw-w64/files/Toolchains%20targetting%20Win64/Automated%20Builds/>.
> It works both as a native compiler and for cross-compiling (which I tested
> on 32 bit Windows, but could in theory be done on any of the supported
> hosts, including Linux, Darwin and Cygwin).
>
> The required changes are very modest, and I'd like to commit this so we can
> get some buildfarm coverage (I don't have an available 64 bit Windows
> machine for running a buildfarm member right now. but maybe someone else
> does.)
>
> There will be some small consequent documentation changes.

+#ifndef _WIN32_WINNT
#define _WIN32_WINNT 0x0501
+#endif

That seems unsafe in general. What if _WIN32_WINNT is already defined,
but to something lower than 0x0501?Might be better to do:
#ifdef _WIN32_WINNT
#undef _WIN32_WINNT
#endif

instead?

+#ifndef WIN64
#define _WINSOCKAPI_

Did you verify that that's not needed on win64-msvc? (my VM isn't
booted right now, so I didn't actually test it)

Other than those comments, looks good to me.

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

On 01/30/2011 11:52 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 16:47, Andrew Dunstan<andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>> The attached patch allows building a 64 bit Windows Postgres using the
>> mingw64 compiler from
>> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw-w64/files/Toolchains%20targetting%20Win64/Automated%20Builds/>.
>> It works both as a native compiler and for cross-compiling (which I tested
>> on 32 bit Windows, but could in theory be done on any of the supported
>> hosts, including Linux, Darwin and Cygwin).
>>
>> The required changes are very modest, and I'd like to commit this so we can
>> get some buildfarm coverage (I don't have an available 64 bit Windows
>> machine for running a buildfarm member right now. but maybe someone else
>> does.)
>>
>> There will be some small consequent documentation changes.
> +#ifndef _WIN32_WINNT
> #define _WIN32_WINNT 0x0501
> +#endif
>
> That seems unsafe in general. What if _WIN32_WINNT is already defined,
> but to something lower than 0x0501?Might be better to do:
> #ifdef _WIN32_WINNT
> #undef _WIN32_WINNT
> #endif

Right now we define it to 0x0501 unconditionally, which causes warnings
on practically every file, because the mingw64 headers define it
themselves to 0x0502. We don't really want to redefine it down
ourselves, do we?

Maybe we should do the undefine only if it's lower than 0x0501.

>
> +#ifndef WIN64
> #define _WINSOCKAPI_
>
> Did you verify that that's not needed on win64-msvc? (my VM isn't
> booted right now, so I didn't actually test it)

No, I don't have such a setup, so testing that would be a significant
burden to me. But the buildfarm does (hamerkop). Part of the reason for
wanting to get this onto the buildfarm is to make sure it doesn't upset
anything else. After all that's a major reason for the buildfarm's
existence in the first place.

cheers

andrew

On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 18:35, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>
>
> On 01/30/2011 11:52 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 16:47, Andrew Dunstan<andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>  wrote:
>>>
>>> The attached patch allows building a 64 bit Windows Postgres using the
>>> mingw64 compiler from
>>>
>>> <http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw-w64/files/Toolchains%20targetting%20Win64/Automated%20Builds/>.
>>> It works both as a native compiler and for cross-compiling (which I
>>> tested
>>> on 32 bit Windows, but could in theory be done on any of the supported
>>> hosts, including Linux, Darwin and Cygwin).
>>>
>>> The required changes are very modest, and I'd like to commit this so we
>>> can
>>> get some buildfarm coverage (I don't have an available 64 bit Windows
>>> machine for running a buildfarm member right now. but maybe someone else
>>> does.)
>>>
>>> There will be some small consequent documentation changes.
>>
>> +#ifndef _WIN32_WINNT
>>  #define _WIN32_WINNT 0x0501
>> +#endif
>>
>> That seems unsafe in general. What if _WIN32_WINNT is already defined,
>> but to something lower than 0x0501?Might be better to do:
>> #ifdef _WIN32_WINNT
>> #undef _WIN32_WINNT
>> #endif
>
>
> Right now we define it to 0x0501 unconditionally, which causes warnings on
> practically every file, because the mingw64 headers define it themselves to
> 0x0502. We don't really want to redefine it down ourselves, do we?
>
>
> Maybe we should do the undefine only if it's lower than 0x0501.

Yeah, that seems like the correct thing to do.

>> +#ifndef WIN64
>>  #define _WINSOCKAPI_
>>
>> Did you verify that that's not needed on win64-msvc? (my VM isn't
>> booted right now, so I didn't actually test it)
>
>
> No, I don't have such a setup, so testing that would be a significant burden
> to me. But the buildfarm does (hamerkop). Part of the reason for wanting to
> get this onto the buildfarm is to make sure it doesn't upset anything else.
> After all that's a major reason for the buildfarm's existence in the first
> place.

Well, I'd rather assume that it's there for a reason on the msvc
builds before, so I'd rather have the patch not change the msvc
behavior in the first place. Shouldn't be too hard to do?

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/