Am 24.02.2014 14:07, schrieb Andreas Färber: > Am 23.02.2014 18:02, schrieb Stefan Weil: >> These header files are used by most QEMU source files. If they >> depend on windows.h, all those source files do so, too. >> [...] > > First of all, why was I not CC'ed on this change? > File is listed under "CPU" subsystem in MAINTAINERS. > > Patches not getting sufficient review is one risk, causing merge > conflicts another. People should be aware of changes you make in their > files, even if "just" Windows-related.
Sorry, I simply missed your name in the lengthy output from get_maintainer.pl. > I had moved the field unchanged from another header, I believe. I don't > think this is a good change (assuming the Windows API is still using > this type and not void*), especially since it's #ifdef'ed anyway. Please see my mail to Kevin (which will be sent in a moment). > > And I don't understand why reducing the number of files dependent on > windows.h is a good thing either. Your cover letter does not explain. > We've not been trying to reduce dependencies on glib either, nor is > there precedence for replacing other pointer types elsewhere (e.g. > qemu_irq). Wherever possible, we've been using the most precise pointer > type to let the compiler or static analysis tools help us catch mismatches. See also my other mail. > > Is all this just to speed up rebuilds after MinGW updates? The .d files don't track dependencies to system include files. A MinGW update won't trigger new compilations, so this is not a reason at all. Regards Stefan
