Jonas Hahnfeld <[email protected]> writes:

> On Mon, 2025-08-25 at 21:03 +0200, Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide wrote:
>> Liliypond just had a release again, and it would be great if we could
>> get Guile to a point that Lilypond does not have to patch it anymore for
>> their Windows-releases.
>
> We're patching since a long time, but yes it would be great if there
> was an upstream release that "just worked" (tm) on 64-bit Windows.

I hope we’ll get there. It’s been my wish for several years now and is
the reason why I got push-access on the savannah repo of Guile.

>> Are there any regressions caused by the Lilypond patches?
>
> The refactoring patches should be relatively safe and, as far as I can
> remember, the actual changes only take effect if sizeof(long) <
> sizeof(void *), which is effectively only the case for 64-bit Windows.

That sounds good.

@Mike: would it be OK for you if I first created a PR for these so that
you’d base your changes on top of them?

Best wishes,
Arne
-- 
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein,
ohne es zu merken.
draketo.de

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

  • Re: Guile 64-bit ... Maxime Devos
    • Re: Guile 64... Mike Gran
      • Re: Guil... Maxime Devos
        • Re: ... Mike Gran
          • ... Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
            • ... Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
              • ... Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library
              • ... Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
              • ... Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
              • ... Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library
              • ... Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
              • ... Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
              • ... Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library
              • ... Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
              • ... Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
              • ... Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library
  • Re: Guile 64-bit ... Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library

Reply via email to