mingw-w64 patches for wine-gecko

[Erik van Pienbroek]

Michael Cronenworth schreef op do 11-07-2013 om 14:42 [-0500]:
> In order to have wine-gecko build on F18 it needs at least the following
> upstream commits.
> 
> http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/code/5500/
> http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/code/5505/
> http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/code/5512/
> http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/code/5530/
> http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/code/5569/
> http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/code/5589/
> http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/code/5610/
> http://sourceforge.net/p/mingw-w64/code/5611/
> 
> Also needs mfuuid (commit 5505) and wmcodecdspuuid (commit 5610)
> libraries built to link against.

Hi Michael,

Thanks for this list.
I've tried to backport these commits and get wine-gecko built on F18.
Unfortunately it turned out that a lot more commits are needed.

To get wine-gecko 2.21 built on F18 the following mingw-w64 commits are
needed:

For mingw-headers:
	r5475, r5479, r5484, r5497, r5498, r5499, r5500
	r5503, r5504, r5510, r5511, r5512, r5527, r5530
	r5545, r5552, r5569, r5587, r5589, r5602, r5603
	r5604, r5605, r5606, r5607, r5608, r5609

For mingw-crt:
	r5505, r5610, r5611

As this is a lot more than an average backport I'm unsure what route to
take. Of course I could push updated packages to F18 with these
backported commits, but as the number of patches is quite high we have
the risk of unexpected regressions. Another solution would be to push
the version of mingw-headers/mingw-crt which is currently in F19 to F18
(which is regression-free afaik).

For comparison, here's the difference between F18 and F19:
Fedora 18: 20121110 snapshot, r5451
Fedora 19: 20130614 snapshot, r5904

What are your opinions about pushing a more modern mingw-w64 snapshot to
Fedora 18?

As Fedora 17 is about to become EOL soon I don't have any plans to push
updated packages there any more

Regards,

Erik