Re: Old OSes compatibility [Re: 64-bit (>4GB) inferior data types rules; TYPE_LENGTH: unsigned -> ULONGEST]

[Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>]

On 10/01/2012 06:38 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> From: Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>

>> Older mingw versions would be a host I recall whose libc didn't
>> use to support %z until a couple years ago.

It used to last I looked, but not by default.   See below.

> 
> I don't think MinGW can support %z even today, because the CRT DLL
> doesn't.  See my other message.
> 
>> I believe Eli (like many, due to some technical limitations of gcc
>> 4.x) for example stills uses a mingw with a 3.x gcc.
> 
> That's true, but the main issue here is the library, not the compiler.
> 
>> Not sure whether people are combining newer mingw runtime releases
>> with the 3.x based compilers.
> 
> MinGW runtime does not replace the format conversion engine, it uses
> the MS provided one, AFAIK.  It does augment the MS runtime with
> several functions of the printf family, but AFAIK they do not include
> replacement of the format-conversion code.  If you know otherwise,
> please tell which MinGW source file includes this replacement.

In the old mingw sources copy I have here (2009), I see under
mingwex/stdio/ a printf.c file, which provides the __mingw_printf replacement.
The format conversion engine is in pformat.c, and it does implement '%z'
(look for "case 'z':").

See <http://sourceforge.net/project/shownotes.php?release_id=24832>
for how to enable the replacements.  E.g., #define _GNU_SOURCE
or __USE_MINGW_ANSI_STDIO to 1 should be enough (it defines printf to
__mingw_printf).

I tried looking for the current sources, but the mingw.org frontpage has a news
item mentioning that the sources have moved to git, without giving a pointer to
where the repository is...  Then, after wasting some minutes trying to find
a pointer (and failing; in the end google found it)
I found that http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw/develop points
at "git clone git://mingw.git.sourceforge.net/gitroot/mingw/mingw",
but cloning that yields an empty repo.  WTH?  Is the project actively
trying to hide itself in some dark internet corner?

-- 
Pedro Alves