Bug creation and email sending has been disabled, file new bugs at gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla
Bug 116 - Build script and infrastructure to produce and release Windows binaries.
Summary: Build script and infrastructure to produce and release Windows binaries.
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: GDC
Classification: Unclassified
Component: gdc (show other bugs)
Version: development
Hardware: All All
: --- enhancement
Assignee: Iain Buclaw
URL:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2014-04-07 15:31 CEST by Bruno Medeiros
Modified: 2017-10-09 12:40 CEST (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Bruno Medeiros 2014-04-07 15:31:10 CEST
I would like to use the latest stable/released GDC on Windows, but I find having to build it myself to be annoying and error-prone.

This enhancement request is for an automated build script to be developed, that allows creating Windows binaries, such that the GDC developers (as well as a continuous integration server) can automatically produce Windows binaries, and these can then be released to the public.

Note: the reason I ask for this to build on a CI server is not really for continuous builds, but just to validate that the build scripts works independently of a particular developers machine.
Comment 2 Théo Bueno 2014-04-07 22:59:47 CEST
(In reply to comment #0)

Building GDC on Windows is not as simple as building it on Linux, there is a series of patch to apply before building ... Here are the scripts used to build the latest available windows versions of GDC : https://bitbucket.org/venix1/mingw-gdc
Comment 3 Iain Buclaw 2014-04-08 07:07:14 CEST
Those patches aren't essential. The recent mingw builds are evident of that. However I am aware of some essential runtime fixes in those patches (some TLS related) but almost all are unsuitable for inclusion.
Comment 4 Bruno Medeiros 2014-05-07 14:35:37 CEST
(In reply to Iain Buclaw from comment #3)
> Those patches aren't essential. The recent mingw builds are evident of that.
> However I am aware of some essential runtime fixes in those patches (some
> TLS related) but almost all are unsuitable for inclusion.

Ian, I didn't understand your point, it seems self contradictory. You say the patches aren't essential, and yet at the same time that there are "some essential runtime fixes in those patches" ?..
Comment 5 Iain Buclaw 2014-05-07 15:24:40 CEST
(In reply to Bruno Medeiros from comment #4)
> (In reply to Iain Buclaw from comment #3)
> > Those patches aren't essential. The recent mingw builds are evident of that.
> > However I am aware of some essential runtime fixes in those patches (some
> > TLS related) but almost all are unsuitable for inclusion.
> 
> Ian, I didn't understand your point, it seems self contradictory. You say
> the patches aren't essential, and yet at the same time that there are "some
> essential runtime fixes in those patches" ?..

First point was in response to patches needed to apply to build it (compiler patches, build patches).  These are not required.

The second point was runtime support, which needs some love.

For instance, I have implemented EmuTLS in the runtime backend, but it's not yet working with the GC (attempts to hook the data regions into the D GC have so far caused deadlocks).  If this were to be fixed, you can build GDC on MinGW with --disable-tls
Comment 6 Bruno Medeiros 2014-05-07 15:42:46 CEST
When you say "runtime support", is that D runtime, or the underlying C runtime?
Comment 7 mlatu 2017-10-09 12:40:42 CEST
Am I correct to assume that:
ftp://ftp.gdcproject.org/binaries/x86_64-w64-mingw32/x86_64-w64-mingw32_2.066.1_gcc4.9.2_f378f9ab41_20150413.7z
is the most recent version for compiling for mingw?
In which case its missing on the download page.

On the other hand, it looks like the most recent gcc version is actually 6.3?
In which case, why is there no recent build for the mingw target?