[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable)
From: |
Peder O. Klingenberg |
Subject: |
Re: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable) |
Date: |
Wed, 26 Nov 2014 10:14:12 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.130012 (Ma Gnus v0.12) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
On Tue, Nov 25 2014 at 18:55, Ivan Shmakov wrote:
> Yes, although I’d rather question the necessity of building
> Emacs ‘master’ on an LTS GNU/Linux system. If the intent is to
> use the last decade’s versions of Libc and Coreutils, – why
> Emacs has to be newer than that?
Because features. My desktop machine runs Kubuntu 10.04 still, because
it mostly does what I need without needing my attention all the time, it
is a stable platform I can use to get work done.
There is no conscious desire to run old software for nostalgias sake,
more a lack of desire to upgrade willy-nilly with the associated
breakage-fixing and retraining of muscle memory because some dimwits
decided to reinvent everything badly.
I do most of my work in Emacs. That means I care about it more than I
care about this months desktop fad, the latest and greatest in init
systems, or whatever fancy gui+daemon should be used to dynamically
configure the network on my perfectly stationary, hardwired desktop
machine.
I started building emacs from trunk because the repository version had
features I wanted. Mostly --daemon, which is a killer feature and a
real productivity boost for me, and which was not available in the
distro-packaged emacs. I was willing to invest the time and effort
involved to get a better emacs, but I was, and am, reluctant to upgrade
the bits of the machine that work just fine.
> Especially given that the older versions of the system, when
> necessary to support legacy software, could be just as well be
> run in chroot(2) environments. (Or even be entirely “virtual.”)
It's not about legacy software. It's about how I choose to spend my
limited time. Playing sysadmin was really exciting back when I
installed slackware from a stack of floppies. These days, time spent
maintaining the OS is time not spent doing what they pay me to do, and
what I enjoy doing - develop software.
...Peder...
--
I wish a new life awaited _me_ in some off-world colony.
- Buildbot for Emacs? (was: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable)), (continued)
- Buildbot for Emacs? (was: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable)), Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen, 2014/11/25
- Re: Buildbot for Emacs?, Glenn Morris, 2014/11/25
- Re: Buildbot for Emacs?, Ted Zlatanov, 2014/11/25
- Re: Buildbot for Emacs?, Glenn Morris, 2014/11/25
- Re: Buildbot for Emacs?, Ted Zlatanov, 2014/11/25
- Re: Buildbot for Emacs?, Tom, 2014/11/26
- Re: Buildbot for Emacs?, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen, 2014/11/25
- Re: Buildbot for Emacs?, Glenn Morris, 2014/11/25
- Re: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable), Stefan Monnier, 2014/11/25
- Re: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable), Ivan Shmakov, 2014/11/25
- Re: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable),
Peder O. Klingenberg <=
- Re: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable), Ivan Shmakov, 2014/11/26
- Re: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable), Peder O. Klingenberg, 2014/11/26
- Re: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable), Ted Zlatanov, 2014/11/26
- Re: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable), Peder O. Klingenberg, 2014/11/26
- Re: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable), Stefan Monnier, 2014/11/26
- Re: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable), Ted Zlatanov, 2014/11/26
- Re: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable), Ted Zlatanov, 2014/11/26
- Re: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable), Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen, 2014/11/26
- Re: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable), Stefan Monnier, 2014/11/26
- Re: proposal: require GnuTLS 3.1.x (previous stable), Ted Zlatanov, 2014/11/26