Igal @ Lucee.org wrote:
> Alvaro -- thank you for your reply!
>
> So to clarify (in the hopes that it would allow me to keep some hair on my
> head by the end of this process, as I already pulled out most of it by
> now)...
> your process was as follows?
>
> build-dir$ ~/source-dir/configure --host=x86_64-w64-mingw32
> ...
> build-dir$ make
> ...
> errors
> build-dir$ make distclean
> ...
> build-dir$ ~/source-dir/configure --host=x86_64-w64-mingw32
> ...
> build-dir$ make
> ...
>
> ?
Yes, probably something like that. I think it failed the first time
because there was a bug (the one I introduced in a967613911f7), then
probably changed to src/backend and ran compiles there which probably
worked fine, leading to commit fa838b555f90. I might or might not have
removed the complete build dir instead of "make distclean"; not sure
TBH. As I recall, I tried a couple of builds after I pushed the fix
commit and couldn't get them to run at all. But since I saw in
buildfarm that other mingw builds were working, I lost interest. Then I
deleted the mingw build tree and didn't get back to retrying.
TBH the only reason I mingled with mingw at all is that nobody seems
interested in fixing Win32 issues, and this patch had been lingering for
far too long.
> Or did you not do a VPATH build the second time?
I never build in the source tree, so this is pretty unlikely.
> Did you use any other options?
None.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services