[libmicrohttpd] Add support for Windows ARM builds #31088
Conversation
|
@microsoft-github-policy-service agree company="Microsoft" |
| #define W32_VARDECORPREFIX _ | ||
| #define W32_DECORVARNAME(v) _ ## v | ||
| #define W32_VARDECORPEFIXSTR "_" | ||
| diff --git a/w32/VS2015/hellobrowser.vcxproj b/w32/VS2015/hellobrowser.vcxproj |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This patch is minimally modifying only the VS2015 solution that actually gets built by the port. The other flavors for VS2017, 2019, and 2022 can be updated similarly if there's desire to build one of these instead.
|
Has this change been submitted upstream? |
I'm not sure I understand the question. It's my first time opening a PR for vcpkg. I though that submitting the PR to the repo is what I was supposed to do for the upstream. |
Ah, sorry for the confusion. This seems like a bugfix to the build system of libmicrohttpd; there's no reason that the fix should be specific to vcpkg. In general we like to make sure upstream, in this case the folks who make libmicrohttpd, are at least notified when there are not specific-to-vcpkg patches like this. It helps avoid situations like https://wiki.debian.org/SSLkeys#End_User_Summary where Debian added OpenSSL patches that broke key generation. Because this seems to only touch build system stuff we don't necessarily need to wait for those folks to have merged the changes before proceeding, but we would prefer if they were at least notified. |
jimwang118
added
the
category:port-feature
OK I see what you mean now :). Given how this library is maintained it's hard to figure out if there's even a plan to support ARM builds. I don't see any open issues regarding that or a way to submit a PR for their build system. I understand if you're unwilling to take this change in VCPKG and I can find an alternative path forward for the use-case I'm trying to cover on my end, |
|
@BillyONeal I will notify the microhttpd mailing list regarding the ARM support and the related change posted here. Seeing that a change from 0.9.75 to 0.9.76 took over a year, a response and/or acknowledgement may take a while :) |
|
The proper fix will be provided by the upstream. |
Sure, like I said, we don't absolutely need them to have responded with a release or similar, but we do want to see that they at least have been notified and haven't explicitly said 'no we don't want that' or similar.
Is it expected that they'll drop a release for that or should we just add whatever patch they decided to do? |
|
@BillyONeal I just reached out to the mailing list yesterday and have not heard back yet. I'll wait to see if there is a response on their end with willingness (or unwillingness) to take the change on their end. In the case the upstream is not interested in supporting an ARM build, will this be acceptable to take this change into VCPKG or will the path forward be blocked? |
I think we should give them 30 days to respond but if they don't we'll take the patch. Is there a link to a mailing list archive or something we can record here? |
BillyONeal
added
the
depends:upstream-changes
One thing I did not realize till later when I saw the mailing list digest is that @Karlson2k is involved in microhttpd and willing to take the upstream changes needed to enable the ARM builds. Thank you @Karlson2k for that! @BillyONeal given that, I think I will leave this PR open until the upstream is updated and then I will update the port with the correct version bump for libmicrohttpd with ARM support. Does that sound reasonable? BTW this is the mailing list archive for reference https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/libmicrohttpd/2023-04/msg00003.html |
Sounds good, just un-draft the PR when you are ready by clicking the 'ready for review' button :) |
I'm the upstream maintainer. The support will be implemented in git master soon. You can wait for the new release (with other fixes) or just cherry-pick commits for ARM/ARM64 support in VS project files. BTW I see other problems in current portfile: wrong set of headers used, completely disabled ARM and others. ARM is fully supported when libmicrohttpd built by GCC or clang. Only MSVC implementation is not complete. |
|
The Visual Studio with ARM/ARM64 support has been added in git master. The diff:
After some testing it will be pulled to the next version branch and then published. |
@Karlson2k Thank you so much for the upstream update. I'm trying it out now by taking your patch into my vcpkg fork so I can build it through the pipeline and test it out. It will take a day or two to find the time to test the ARM builds, but I will let you know as soon as this is done. |
FYI @Karlson2k I was able to confirm the ARM binaries of libmicrohttpd through our internal testing. Let us know when you get the changes merged into the upstream and there's a new version out. |
Thanks for the testing and for the confirmation, @anmatako. |
|
@anmatako The upstream has incorporated the patch that supports |
|
Actually the fixed version was already merged via PR #31740 so probably this PR should be closed. |
|
Duplicate of #31740 |
SHA512s are updated for each updated downloadAny fixed CI baseline entries are removed from that file.Any patches that are no longer applied are deleted from the port's directory../vcpkg x-add-version --alland committing the result.