[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: A better autogen.sh
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: A better autogen.sh |
Date: |
Wed, 16 Mar 2011 06:12:26 -0400 |
> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 02:08:21 -0700
> From: Paul Eggert <address@hidden>
> CC: address@hidden, address@hidden
>
> On 03/16/2011 01:10 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> >> > The src/config.in file is one example of these #ifdef-like
> >> > constructs. The main reason we put src/config.in in the
> >> > repository, and keep track of it and commit it by hand,
> >> > is for the MS Windows port.
> > It was never because of MS-DOS. This file was there from day one.
> > This is the first time removal of this file is considered.
>
> The idea has been considered before, I expect.
I'm not getting younger, and my memory is not getting better, but I
cannot recall such a discussion in the past nor a decision to drop the
idea because of non-Posix platforms.
> Right now, the file is in the repository only because of the MS-DOS
> port, and that suggests that the repository copy should be moved to
> the msdos/ subdirectory.
No, right now the file is in the repository because it was always
there, and we are discussing whether to remove it.
> Whenever maintainers feel it necessary, they could autogenerate a
> new version, copy it into the msdos/ subdirectory by hand, and
> commit the result. That should be enough to address concerns
> about the MS-DOS port.
It will be enough if someone takes upon themselves to perform this
duty as a matter of routine. Are you volunteering for the job?
> > And I need to worry about Posix platforms when I edit files in those
> > same directories. So what?
>
> Emacs is part of the GNU project, and the main goal
> of the GNU project, as I'm sure you know, is to develop
> a complete Unix-like operating system that is free software.
> So, it's inherent to Emacs that its code needs to be working
> on Unix-like platforms.
Not on Unix-like platforms. On GNU platforms. That's not the same.
I could understand an argument that supporting Unix-like platforms is
easier. (And even the "easier" argument is IMO minor, looking at all
the stuff in lib/ that is needed to support those Unix-like non-GNU
platforms.) But the argument about being part of the GNU project is
bogus, because there's no difference between MS-Windows and Solaris in
that respect: they are both proprietary platforms.
> > Maybe you will also claim that bidirectional editing is not needed
> > by "the rest of us", so my work on that is not important.
>
> I would not dream of making such a claim. But that is a
> separate issue, and I don't see why it is relevant.
It is relevant because if I lose the ability to build Emacs with no
fuss on Windows, I will be unable to continue my work on bidi.
- Re: A better autogen.sh, (continued)
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Glenn Morris, 2011/03/15
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Glenn Morris, 2011/03/15
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Paul Eggert, 2011/03/15
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Glenn Morris, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Glenn Morris, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Paul Eggert, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Paul Eggert, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: A better autogen.sh, joakim, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh, joakim, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Paul Eggert, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Eli Zaretskii, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Paul Eggert, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Juanma Barranquero, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Juanma Barranquero, 2011/03/16
- Re: A better autogen.sh, Glenn Morris, 2011/03/16