couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nick North <nort...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Compiling snappy under Windows
Date Tue, 19 Jan 2016 18:24:41 GMT
That's what I hoped everyone would say. I'll put in a PR for comment.

Nick
On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 at 18:01, Joan Touzet <wohali@apache.org> wrote:

> I agree we should avoid re-introducing autoconf to the build process.
>
> Hopefully we can fix this with a simple set of #ifdefs in a header file
> somewhere that defines ssize_t (or anything else we need) appropriately,
> or dig into the MS SDK for any references available and include compat
> header files.
>
> -Joan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Alexander Shorin" <kxepal@gmail.com>
> > To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2016 12:15:25 PM
> > Subject: Re: Compiling snappy under Windows
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Nick North <north.n@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > I'm not exactly sure what you are proposing here. Are you saying we
> > > should
> > > run autoconf for the snappy code? There is an earlier commit in
> > > couchdb-snappy repository that removed autotools, saying they did
> > > not work
> > > well with snappy, which makes me a bit cautious about that.
> > > Apologies if
> > > I've misunderstood your suggestion,
> >
> > That's the one of the solutions, but will require to:
> > 1) integrate autoconf run from rebar
> > 2) make autoconf as build dependency
> > 3) ...
> > and all these just for a few C++ types?
> >
> > I proposed to add preprocessor conditional to catch Windows case and
> > inject the right code to make snappy works. Basically, unfold
> > autoconf
> > conditions manually. That's the idea. I'm not sure if this will help,
> > but worth to start from there.
> >
> > --
> > ,,,^..^,,,
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message