[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jun 19 04:23:35 -0700 2006 --- @tono: so far the only issue, that remains unclear is SEH. Please, take a closer

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jun 19 06:12:02 -0700 2006 --- @sb: As I wrote comment at the line of .IF $(GUI)$(COM)==WNTGCC jut before

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jun 19 06:15:53 -0700 2006 --- @vg: I wrote comment for SEH at 2006/05/10 15:00:44 -0700. Wasn't it enough? tono

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jun 12 08:33:20 -0700 2006 --- Not having the time to do a *complete* code review, I just looked at those issues

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jun 12 08:40:38 -0700 2006 --- ...that is, appart from the one -fpermissive and the SEH problem (on which hro

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 User tono changed the following: What|Old value |New value

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed May 31 14:11:12 -0700 2006 --- I have attached new patch set. Due to my cygwin tools situation, it is only for

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed May 10 05:06:08 -0700 2006 --- @tono: Some windows modules are using SEH. These modules except bridges are

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed May 10 05:24:00 -0700 2006 --- @sb: At least in VCL SEH is used in window callback routines as user32.dll uses

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed May 10 06:14:45 -0700 2006 --- @sb: Besides vcl, dtrans/source/win32/misc/ImpHelper.cxx is using SEH to catch

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed May 10 07:59:08 -0700 2006 --- @tono: SEH is used were ever system libraries may cause windows exceptions. You

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed May 10 15:00:44 -0700 2006 --- @hro: I am trying to rewrite the sources like this. --- void SAL_CALL

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun May 7 06:19:06 -0700 2006 --- I have completed the modification suggested by sb but I am facing two serious

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 User maho changed the following: What|Old value |New value

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed May 3 23:06:13 -0700 2006 --- Can we please change target according to the current status/progress of this

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Mar 14 01:38:41 -0800 2006 --- @tono: In the meantme, I have just decided to apply the changes in your B-C

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Mar 13 06:05:35 -0800 2006 --- @sb: I have confirmed all your comments category D and E are relevant. I will

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Mar 7 08:33:44 -0800 2006 --- I just had a somewhat deeper look at about 25% of the proposed changes (309 out of

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Mar 7 13:01:51 -0800 2006 --- @sb: Thank you for your intensive review and I very much appreciate it. Tono, I

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Feb 21 01:13:17 -0800 2006 --- Tono, great work. Just browsing through some of the files from your latest patch

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Feb 21 08:31:52 -0800 2006 --- @sb: 1 For example in bridges_mingw.patch, there are patches against files in

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 User tono changed the following: What|Old value |New value

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Feb 19 06:10:29 -0800 2006 --- Hi, I have uploaded new patch set for OOB_680m1, defining sal_Unicode as

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Jan 29 03:06:07 -0800 2006 --- Hi, By performing the bridge tests suggested by dbo, I foud out another problem

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jan 21 16:56:44 -0800 2006 --- @sb: Hmm ... Replacing wcs... by rtl_ustring... may be sometimes appropriate but

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jan 19 07:53:10 -0800 2006 --- @tono: quoteI can go back to a)+ b) but there are so many windows specific

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jan 17 06:01:15 -0800 2006 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jan 17 06:05:23 -0800 2006 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jan 17 06:17:57 -0800 2006 --- @maho: Actually I do not know what they are. Will you please let me know where I

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Jan 17 06:34:48 -0800 2006 --- @sb: Currently I am doing a) in your comment and system header hacking. I can go

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Jan 15 01:58:36 -0800 2006 --- tono: i cannot find binutil-2.15.94 but 2.16 and your patch doesn't apply cleanly.

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 User maho changed the following: What|Old value |New value

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Jan 15 03:05:14 -0800 2006 --- tono: BTW: how about using gcc-3.4.1+enum fix+Visibility patch so that we have

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 User maho changed the following: What|Old value |New value

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Jan 15 05:11:14 -0800 2006 --- confirmed that gcc-3.4.1+mingw+visibility+enum builds at least for me.

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jan 14 23:40:46 -0800 2006 --- Hi, Fellas, long time no see. I am trying to apply new policy to cope with

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 User mh changed the following: What|Old value |New value

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 16 16:42:56 -0800 2005 --- @dbo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote... IMO I expect little changes when porting to a

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec 15 22:44:51 -0800 2005 --- @tono: Hm, this does not only hurt C++ bridges, but all code. The compiler is

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Dec 13 06:48:48 -0800 2005 --- @dbo: I have posted a message to mingw-users mailing list and come to know that

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Dec 13 06:54:53 -0800 2005 --- @vg: I am going to reorganize the patches including only the parts required for

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Dec 12 03:34:36 -0800 2005 --- @tono: please, provide us a set of patches, which deal with port only, all

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Dec 7 03:14:47 -0800 2005 --- @dbo: I have reported the bug of gccc to gcc bugzilla. (

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Dec 6 14:19:31 -0800 2005 --- @dbo: I have tested the bridge and found out the bridge is not working well with

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Dec 5 01:47:21 -0800 2005 --- @tono: concerning your proposed #ifdef BROKEN_ALLOCA #define ALLOCA malloc

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Dec 3 04:54:29 -0800 2005 --- @vg: I failed to comment on dbaccess/source/ui/dlg/makefile.mk. I did not

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 2 01:57:33 -0800 2005 --- dbo made me aware of another strange thing in your patches. There are a number of

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 2 05:53:05 -0800 2005 --- @tono: last comment unveils a reason why some changes should be rewritten. The

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 2 09:15:13 -0800 2005 --- @vg: Actually when I was working with 1.0 codeline, I was using typedef sal_uInt16

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 2 17:00:59 -0800 2005 --- @vg: In the last message I meant that I do not want to decide immediately and

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 2 17:11:07 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 2 17:23:18 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 2 17:40:52 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 2 18:12:14 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 2 18:46:57 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Dec 2 20:57:40 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec 1 01:32:49 -0800 2005 --- @tono: So mingw's alloca() is broken, has anybody influence so this will be fixed?

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec 1 06:17:53 -0800 2005 --- tools/source/fsys/dirent.cxx lines 1204-1218: the block #ifndef BOOTSTRAP ... now

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec 1 06:18:13 -0800 2005 --- @tono: tools/source/fsys/dirent.cxx lines 1204-1218: the block #ifndef BOOTSTRAP

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec 1 06:33:16 -0800 2005 --- @tono: avmedia/source/win/player.cxx line 49:#include qedit.h why it's not

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec 1 06:43:53 -0800 2005 --- @dbo: Thank you for your comment. I appreciate it very much. I will use testtools

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec 1 08:21:26 -0800 2005 --- @tono: Please, review shell/inc/internal/i_xml_parser_event_handler.hxx : two

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec 1 17:54:52 -0800 2005 --- @tono, vg: to use alloca, we include sal/alloca.h otherwise should be cleanup'ed.

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Dec 1 22:25:53 -0800 2005 --- @maho: bad idea. malloc() needs a corresponding free() while alloca() does not,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 30 03:25:31 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 30 03:33:23 -0800 2005 --- @tono: I disagree with patches in bridges concerning alloca() - malloc(), e.g.

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 30 04:33:51 -0800 2005 --- @dbo: The fact is that mingw does have alloca which works but incompatible with

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 30 04:48:41 -0800 2005 --- @tono: ( concerning const SwFmtRefMark* SwDoc::GetRefMark( sal_uInt16 nIndex )

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 30 07:36:11 -0800 2005 --- @tono: in fpicker: source/win32/misc/makefile.mk line 40:ENABLE_EXCEPTIONS=YES

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 30 08:15:44 -0800 2005 --- @tono: so3/source/ole/soole.h, lines 121 478. Any comments on this?

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Nov 29 09:26:03 -0800 2005 --- @tono: binfilter/inc/bf_sw/doc.hxx there are string 1627 commented (with //) and I

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Nov 29 09:55:13 -0800 2005 --- bf_sw/source/core/doc/sw_doc.cxx - lines 279-750 are commented in original...

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 User vg changed the following: What|Old value |New value

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 28 04:55:17 -0800 2005 --- @tono: I have attached a diff between stl_gcc.h from our builds and the one with

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 28 07:43:33 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 25 21:41:54 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Nov 26 03:35:35 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 25 07:52:55 -0800 2005 --- @tono: in binfilter: inc/bf_sw/doc.hxx the line: /*N*/ const SwFmtRefMark*

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 25 09:23:42 -0800 2005 --- @tono: changes in testtools/source/bridgetest/cli/makefile.mk do not seem to be

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 25 18:11:56 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 25 19:03:44 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 23 03:03:17 -0800 2005 --- @tono: in solenv/inc/libs.mk why you have: XMLSECLIB=-lxmlsec1-1

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 23 08:17:32 -0800 2005 --- @tono: last problem is in tg_def.mk (_tg_def.mk)

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 23 08:10:33 -0800 2005 --- @tono: all _tg_*.mk in solenv/inc are made from correspondent tg_*.mk with

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 23 06:57:59 -0800 2005 --- @tono: yes, whith sal/inc/sal/types.h I meant exactly that. solenv/inc/tg_shl.mk,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 24 06:43:01 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 24 06:49:36 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 24 07:12:03 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 24 06:54:19 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 24 07:09:04 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 24 08:35:37 -0800 2005 --- @tono: I do not think that one more patch is a best solution. I would prefer

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Nov 22 08:04:55 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Nov 22 05:10:49 -0800 2005 --- @tono: hi, the chanches in STLport-4.5/stlport/config/stl_gcc.h seem to influence

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Nov 22 05:34:35 -0800 2005 --- @tono: stlport/makefile.mk lines 200,201 seem to be something wrong: .IF

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 21 02:46:37 -0800 2005 --- @tono: _MSC_VER macro checks in sal/inc/sal/types.h do seem implemented properly,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Nov 21 02:54:12 -0800 2005 --- @tono: last post should was ment as: _MSC_VER macro checks in sal/inc/sal/types.h

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Nov 18 05:42:19 -0800 2005 --- @tono: Yes, you're right. Have no idea why the cp command hasn't it copied.

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 17 05:02:10 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 17 08:42:00 -0800 2005 --- @tono: still do not have: bridges/source/cpp_uno/mingw_intel/call.s

[tools-issues] [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and in formation for SRC680 codeline

To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue: http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=53572 --- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 17 14:15:00 -0800 2005 --- In message [Issue 53572] MinGW port efforts and information for SRC680 codeline,

  1   2   >