[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       freedesktop-dbus
Subject:    Re: Windows x64 support
From:       Fridrich Strba <fridrich.strba () bluewin ! ch>
Date:       2010-04-29 17:13:35
Message-ID: 1272561202.19039.6.camel () strbadell ! localdomain
[Download RAW message or body]

OK, this has just a sense for windows 64-bit and only for the
x86_64-*-mingw32 target, so whether there is stdint.h (which the
configure checks for already) or other header, that is more generic,
will not have a real impact on whether dbus will be buildable on LP64
platforms.

Cheers

Fridrich

On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 18:09 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: 
> On Thu, 29 Apr 2010 at 19:05:06 +0200, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > Em Quinta-feira 29 Abril 2010, Ã s 13:03:49, Ralf Habacker escreveu:
> > > stdint.h is not available on msvc < 2010
> > 
> > stdint.h is a C99 header, which Microsoft hasn't really decided to support. 
> > How about inttypes.h?
> 
> Replacing stdint.h with inttypes.h throughout is probably a good idea, assuming
> it exists on Windows:
> 
>     `inttypes.h' vs. `stdint.h'
>          The C99 standard says that `inttypes.h' includes `stdint.h', so
>          there's no need to include `stdint.h' separately in a standard
>          environment.  Some implementations have `inttypes.h' but not
>          `stdint.h' (e.g., Solaris 7), but we don't know of any
>          implementation that has `stdint.h' but not `inttypes.h'.
> 
>     -- autoconf.info,  §5.6.1 "Portability of Headers"
> 
> Regards,
>     S
> _______________________________________________
> dbus mailing list
> dbus@lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dbus
> 



_______________________________________________
dbus mailing list
dbus@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dbus

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]