RE: Windows build, nonexistent functions

> -Original Message- > From: Stefan Küng [mailto:tortoise...@gmail.com] > Sent: zondag 29 mei 2011 14:41 > To: Bert Huijben > Cc: 'Greg Stein'; 'Subversion Development'; 'Daniel Shahaf' > Subject: Re: Windows build, nonexistent functi

Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

On 29.05.2011 14:25, Bert Huijben wrote: I've adjusted the TSVN build to remove those functions from the extractor.py output. So it's not a big deal for me. But I'm still wondering whether the Windows build for the svn client works. Can anyone here try it? If it works, those functions could stay

RE: Windows build, nonexistent functions

> -Original Message- > From: Stefan Küng [mailto:tortoise...@gmail.com] > Sent: zondag 29 mei 2011 10:03 > To: Greg Stein > Cc: Subversion Development; Daniel Shahaf > Subject: Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions > > On 29.05.2011 09:54, Greg Stein wrote: &

Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

Stefan Küng wrote on Sun, May 29, 2011 at 10:03:01 +0200: > But I'm still wondering whether the Windows build for the svn client > works. Can anyone here try it? The build works every day for N windows-based devs and 2 windows buildbots. If you're going to ask "Does the Windows build work", I sug

Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

On 29.05.2011 09:54, Greg Stein wrote: On May 29, 2011 2:55 AM, "Stefan Küng" mailto:tortoise...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > On 29.05.2011 04:31, Greg Stein wrote: >> On May 28, 2011 1:39 PM, "Stefan Küng" mailto:tortoise...@gmail.com> >>

Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

On May 29, 2011 2:55 AM, "Stefan Küng" wrote: > > On 29.05.2011 04:31, Greg Stein wrote: >> On May 28, 2011 1:39 PM, "Stefan Küng" > > wrote: >... >> > >> > I did a grep search for those functions, and the only files they >> showed up were the headers, no other file

Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

On 29.05.2011 04:31, Greg Stein wrote: On May 28, 2011 1:39 PM, "Stefan Küng" mailto:tortoise...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > On 28.05.2011 19:33, Daniel Shahaf wrote: >> >> Fair enough. >> >> However, we don't have a practice of keeping declarations without >> corresponding definitions. If th

Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

On May 28, 2011 1:39 PM, "Stefan Küng" wrote: > > On 28.05.2011 19:33, Daniel Shahaf wrote: >> >> Fair enough. >> >> However, we don't have a practice of keeping declarations without >> corresponding definitions. If that is indeed the case (as opposed to >> definitions which are conditional on pr

Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

On 28.05.2011 19:33, Daniel Shahaf wrote: Stefan Küng wrote on Sat, May 28, 2011 at 19:05:34 +0200: On 28.05.2011 19:03, Daniel Shahaf wrote: Stefan Küng wrote on Sat, May 28, 2011 at 15:43:58 +0200: I think having such functions mentioned in the header but not implemented is not good. Why a

Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

Stefan Küng wrote on Sat, May 28, 2011 at 19:05:34 +0200: > On 28.05.2011 19:03, Daniel Shahaf wrote: >> Stefan Küng wrote on Sat, May 28, 2011 at 15:43:58 +0200: >>> I think having such functions mentioned in the header but not >>> implemented is not good. >> >> Why are you telling us that? You h

Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

On 28.05.2011 19:03, Daniel Shahaf wrote: Stefan Küng wrote on Sat, May 28, 2011 at 15:43:58 +0200: I think having such functions mentioned in the header but not implemented is not good. Why are you telling us that? You have commit access. I don't want to break something. Maybe those will g

Re: Windows build, nonexistent functions

Stefan Küng wrote on Sat, May 28, 2011 at 15:43:58 +0200: > I think having such functions mentioned in the header but not > implemented is not good. Why are you telling us that? You have commit access.