Re: windows patches

[Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp dot org>]

Hi Ulf,

On Thu, 2017-05-04 at 18:56 +0200, Ulf Hermann wrote:
> all patches I consider suitable for upstream right now have been
> posted here now. With all of them applied you still don't get useful
> elfutils on windows, as for example the date preservation in some of
> the tools doesn't work. I have more patches that just blatantly drop
> functionality I don't need in order to make things work. I don't think
> you want those and in fact I'm fairly sure I'm stretching it already,
> so I'll stop here.
> 
> I might come back with more patches when I find a better solution to
> the remaining issues.

Thanks a lot for all your work and posting the patches.
I will go through them next week.

I quickly scanned some just now. Some seem fine to go in. But others are
a bit more iffy. I think some should really go towards gnulib if we are
going to use that anyway so other projects get the same portability
benefits. And I do worry a bit about others, like the O_BINARY one for
example that patches every open call. That seems impossible to properly
maintain and is clearly intended for a platform that is really not even
POSIX/Unix-like.

Cheers,

Mark