Re: Guile 64-bit Windows support, redux

"Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" <[email protected]> Mon, 25 Aug 2025 21:03:51 +0200

Newsgroups	gmane.lisp.guile.devel
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

"Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" <[email protected]> writes:

> Jonas Hahnfeld <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> On Wed, 2025-08-20 at 20:21 +0200, Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
>>> "Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" <[email protected]> writes:
>>> 
>>> > Mike Gran <[email protected]> writes:
>>> > 
>>> > > So I'm still plugging away at this Guile on Windows stuff.
>>> …
>>> > > I haven't pushed anything back to the main Guile git repo 
>>> > > savannah yet, because I don't want y'all to see me flailing around.
>>> It would be really cool to have good support on Windows again and to
>>> reduce the amount of patching necessary for Lilypond.

>> I would like to point out that the patches currently used by LilyPond
>> are still floating around, they are now nearing their second birthday:
>> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2023-10/msg00051.html
>> AFAICT there still has not been a single comment on the approach taken
>> and whether it might be more suitable than heavily patching mini-gmp...
>
> @Mike: could we as concrete way forward first merge those patches and
>        switch to your approach later? Better become better now and
>        perfect later than staying bad until we can be perfect.
>
>        Are there points in the patches that are absolute show-stoppers?

Liliypond just had a release again, and it would be great if we could
get Guile to a point that Lilypond does not have to patch it anymore for
their Windows-releases.

I had high hopes in May that we could get there quickly, but time has
flown by again

Would it be OK for you if I merged the Lilypond patches and you’d rebase
your patches on top of theirs?

Are there any regressions caused by the Lilypond patches?

Best wishes,
Arne
-- 
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein,
ohne es zu merken.
draketo.de

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 1.1 KB)