From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#6660: xassert failure on make custom-deps Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:49:06 +0300 Message-ID: <83iq4edpfh.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83zkxqe81b.fsf@gnu.org> <83oce6dt2c.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1279386043 27877 80.91.229.12 (17 Jul 2010 17:00:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 17:00:43 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 6660@debbugs.gnu.org To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 17 19:00:40 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OaAkf-0006ur-3n for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:00:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44598 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OaAke-00056Z-85 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2010 13:00:36 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=52440 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OaAkY-00056U-9H for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2010 13:00:31 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OaAkX-0006h4-2H for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2010 13:00:29 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:59100) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OaAkX-0006gx-0r for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2010 13:00:29 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OaAaR-00026I-7W; Sat, 17 Jul 2010 12:50:03 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 16:50:03 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 6660 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 6660-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B6660.12793853618056 (code B ref 6660); Sat, 17 Jul 2010 16:50:03 +0000 Original-Received: (at 6660) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jul 2010 16:49:21 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OaAZl-00025t-97 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2010 12:49:21 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OaAZk-00025n-1b for 6660@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2010 12:49:20 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0L5P00900NYSBE00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for 6660@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:49:07 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.61.30]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0L5P007YTO1UK440@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Sat, 17 Jul 2010 19:49:07 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 12:50:03 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:38637 Archived-At: > From: Juanma Barranquero > Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 18:29:52 +0200 > Cc: 6660@debbugs.gnu.org > > On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 17:30, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > How about turning it on by default in nt/configure.bat, when --no-opt > > was specified? > > I'm all for it, but it has a small, though non-negligible impact on > performance. Are the official binary builds for Windows optimized or > non-optimized? I don't know. Perhaps we should simply add another switch to configure.bat, like, for example, --enable-checking. That would keep everyone happy.