Re: [xml] RFC: mingw autoconf && config.h vs. win32config.h

[Igor Zlatkovic <igor stud fh-frankfurt de>]

> Hi,

Ho,

> In 2.4.24, the win32/Makefile.mingw didn't work as it had in 2.4.23
> and I've been using the Linux Debian MinGW cross-tools and thought
> that configuring with autoconf, etc. would be nice especially now that
> the MinGW team has provided us with MSYS.

The Makefile.mingw I was playing with was never in the CVS. I totally
rewrote it and it is very similar to the MSVC makefile. But, since I ended
the game with those link problems, I never commited the makefile.

> I *personally* would like to see the DLL built with libtool but
> apparently that support is only in the CVS tree of libtool right
> now. But that's just me and my reasoning is skewed toward the GNU
> tools ;-)

You may build the DLL with steel and concrete for all I care, as long the
required modiifications don't break existing things :-)

> Right, but the ./configure makes a "config.h" and there is some
> selection process in nanohttp.c that included win32config.h and did
> not include config.h. To my understanding, Winsock is very similar to
> the standard so perhaps an addition of various #define's within
> config.h would allow cross-compatability with relativly minimal
> changes.

I saw you adding those defines in nanohttp.c, not in config.h :-)

> Please correct me if I'm wrong on this; my win32 book does not have
> socket information in it.

It has a mandatory initialisation and shutdown and completely different
error codes. The rest should be the same.

> Someone recently posted information on a patch for building on MSYS
> with much less fuss so perhaps this is not needed, and indeed, if and
> when this is implemented, I shall receive much better feedback.

I would say rather establish a contact and do the MSYS port together with
others who need it.

Ciao
Igor