bug#1191: marked as done (How to contribute back changes for Emacs on Solaris)

[don@donarmstrong.com (Emacs bug Tracking System)]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 900 bytes --]


Your message dated Thu, 11 Dec 2008 19:09:02 -0800 (PST)
with message-id <200812120309.mBC392kD002742@mothra.ics.uci.edu>
and subject line Re: bug#1191: How to contribute back changes for Emacs on Solaris
has caused the Emacs bug report #1191,
regarding How to contribute back changes for Emacs on Solaris
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact don@donarmstrong.com
immediately.)


-- 
1191: http://emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1191
Emacs Bug Tracking System
Contact don@donarmstrong.com with problems

[-- Attachment #2: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 4486 bytes --]

From: Ali Bahrami <ali_gnu@emvision.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
Subject: How to contribute back changes for Emacs on Solaris
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 21:44:20 -0600
Message-ID: <48F80A14.7010502@emvision.com>

This message is a follow up to one I sent to emacs-devel
last July:

	http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2008-07/msg00070.html

The question had to do with why emacs wasn't using dldump()
to produce the dumped executable under Solaris. It had been using it
up until 2002, at which point it was commented out, and it wasn't
clear why. No one knew the reason, and the consensus was "try it and see".

Since then, I've done some work to integrate emacs with
OpenSolaris as a standard package. I turned on dldump(),
and have been using the emacs binaries built with it daily
since July without issue.

So now, I have some things I'd like to send back up stream
and get integrated into the emacs distribution:

	- Man pages for things installed to /usr/bin that didn't
	  already have a manpage:
		b2m.1
		ebrowse.1
		grep-changelog.1
		rcs-checkin.1
	- Small changes to config.guess and configure to properly
	  detect amd64 hardware running Solaris.
	- Use dldump() instead of the generic ELF dump code
	  under Solaris.
	- Use the system malloc under Solaris (at least with
	  amd64, emacs crashes without this).

The manpages can be viewed at:

http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/sfw/usr/src/cmd/emacs/augment/man/man1/b2m.1
http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/sfw/usr/src/cmd/emacs/augment/man/man1/ebrowse.1
http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/sfw/usr/src/cmd/emacs/augment/man/man1/grep-changelog.1
http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/sfw/usr/src/cmd/emacs/augment/man/man1/rcs-checkin.1

and the patches at:

http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/sfw/usr/src/cmd/emacs/augment/patch/config.guess.patch
http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/sfw/usr/src/cmd/emacs/augment/patch/configure.patch
http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/sfw/usr/src/cmd/emacs/augment/patch/dldump.patch
http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/sfw/usr/src/cmd/emacs/augment/patch/sysmalloc.patch

The patches are for emacs 22.1. I've examined 22.3, and the
changes are applicable there as well. If 22.1 diffs are OK,
that's easiest for me, but if not, then please let me know what
I need to supply. These diffs are all very short, affecting a
small number of lines in each file.

So my questions: How can I go about submitting these changes?
Is there someone who might work with me to get this done?
What format would you need to get them in, and where can
I send them?

Thanks!

- Ali




[-- Attachment #3: Type: message/rfc822, Size: 2228 bytes --]

From: Dan Nicolaescu <dann@ics.uci.edu>
To: 1191-done@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com
Subject: Re: bug#1191: How to contribute back changes for Emacs on Solaris
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 19:09:02 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <200812120309.mBC392kD002742@mothra.ics.uci.edu>

Ali Bahrami <ali_gnu@emvision.com> writes:

  > I think we're done! Thanks...

OK.  Thanks.