Re: [Mingw-cross-env-list] MemoryBarrier needed for dbus

[Tony Theodore]

On 27 September 2011 09:58, Volker Grabsch <address@hidden> wrote:
> Tony Theodore schrieb:
>> On 24 September 2011 10:42, Volker Grabsch <address@hidden> wrote:
>> > I propose to keep our current policy, which is: patches should always
>> > be portable, anything else is a "hack" and thus a $(SED) action. With
>> > portable I don't mean that it sould work with win32/win64, but also
>> > on any other platform.
> [...]
>> Agree entirely.
>>
>> > The idea is that ideally, all patches would eventually move into
>> > upstream, or have at least a good chance of being a sensible proposal
>> > to upstream.
>>
>> It's just that I would consider the mingw32 project to be the final
>> upstream for a patch like this. Patching the dbus sources fixes it for
>> dbus, patching win32api makes this function available to any project.
>> The latter seems to closer to the spirit of our policy.
>
> That's true. In that sense, patching win32api would also
> be perfectly okay.
>
> However, I don't quite see the connection between this
> issue and our plan to support 64-bit. Am I overlooking
> something, or did I just misunderstand you?

No, you're right, there's no direct connection - I was just trying to
think of a case where we would need target specific patches, but
haven't found one yet.

Cheers,

Tony