Re: [Mingw-w64-public] Changes needed to get wine-gecko 2.34 built against mingw-w64 v3.3.0

[Jacek C. <ja...@co...>]

Hi Erik,

On 01/02/15 14:50, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
> Jacek Caban schreef op vr 02-01-2015 om 10:46 [+0100]:
>> On 01/01/15 18:30, Erik van Pienbroek wrote:
>>> Apparently wine-gecko fails to build when these symbols are only
>>> available with _WIN32_WINNT >= 0x0600. @Jacek: could this be a
>>> wine-gecko bug? I've workaround'ed this issue in Fedora 20 using
>>> attached 0021-Lower-_WIN32_WINNT-requirements-for-Un-RegisterPower.patch
>>> but my guess is this is not the right fix as I think wine-gecko should
>>> set _WIN32_WINNT to 0x0600 while compiling the file
>>> hal/windows/WindowsBattery.cpp.
>> I don't see the problem here. I remember fixing some version handling
>> version macros for similar reason. Maybe 4d7b86c46 would help.
> Hi Jacek,
>
> I tried building wine-gecko without the
> 0021-Lower-_WIN32_WINNT-requirements-for-Un-RegisterPower.patch
> workaround which I mentioned in my initial post and replaced it with a
> cherry-pick of commit 4d7b86c46. Unfortunately this combination fails
> with:
>
> /home/erik/fedora/mingw-wine-gecko/mingw-wine-gecko-2.34/wine-mozilla-2.34/hal/windows/WindowsBattery.cpp:24:17: error: 'RegisterPowerSettingNotification' was not declared in this scope
>  static decltype(RegisterPowerSettingNotification)*
> sRegisterPowerSettingNotification = nullptr;

I gave it another thought from another perspective. We don't need those
notifications for wine-gecko anyway, so I will disable related code. I
will let you know when I commit that.

>>> Would it be possible to backport all the commits mentioned in this mail
>>> to the mingw-w64 v3.x branch and release a mingw-w64 v3.4.0 soon so
>>> others can benefit from these changes as well?
>> I'm not really involved in stable branches. That's quite a few patches
>> to cherry-pick, so it's not something an usual stable branch should
>> take. On the other hand, if stable releases are so rare, maybe existing
>> stable releases should take more cherry-picks.
> I agree that the amount of changes is quite large and that is is
> questionable whether this really is material for the v3.x branch..but on
> the other hand it is the only realistic option we have if we want to be
> able to get the latest wine working in Fedora 20.
>
>> Maybe we could find some long term solution. How did you deal with
>> mingw-w64 requirements in the past, when wine-gecko was released every
>> three months? How hard would it be to use some version off the master
>> branch just for wine-gecko?
> In the mailing list thread "RFE: New stable release" I just tried to
> explain how we do things in Fedora (it's a bit off-topic for this
> specific thread).

In general I personally agree that we should release more, but I will
reply in another thread to that. I don't want this to be mixed with
wine-gecko releases discussion.

Jacek