[ccache] Win32 support.

Ramiro Polla ramiro.polla at gmail.com
Mon Jul 12 15:05:55 MDT 2010

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Joel Rosdahl <joel at rosdahl.net> wrote:
> Regarding the "Win32 support" patch:
> I suspect that the static inline functions in ccache.h will result in
> portibility problems, so I think it's better to just move them to util.c.

The semester at university is over, so now I have time to look at the
patches again in the next few days.

> Maybe the definition and use of is_win32_dir should be surrounded by
> #ifdef _WIN32 guards?

I've reworked the mmap wrapper to avoid the need of is_win32_dir (it
caused a failure in cygwin the way it was). I'll update my git fork
and ping the list when it's done.

> Why is a check for both "ccache" and "ccache.exe" needed? Doesn't
> argv[0] on Windows always end with the actual extension? The reason I'm
> asking is that if only "ccache.exe" is needed, we could maybe use the
> EXEEXT variable from autoconf and avoid the conditional compilation.
> Why is the special handling of shell scripts needed?

It had something to do with the regression tests. When the compiler
being called is a script around the actual compiler, CreateProcess


Do you think you could update the list configuration so that Reply-To
points to the list instead of the sender?

Ramiro Polla

More information about the ccache mailing list