From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: quimby.gnus.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: configure tests for graphics libraries Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002 10:58:01 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <200202241758.g1OHw1n15025@aztec.santafe.edu> References: <200202162157.g1GLvIG10113@aztec.santafe.edu> <200202220431.g1M4VbB13843@aztec.santafe.edu> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: quimby2.netfonds.no X-Trace: quimby2.netfonds.no 1014573811 29903 195.204.10.66 (24 Feb 2002 18:03:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@quimby2.netfonds.no NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 Feb 2002 18:03:31 GMT Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby2.netfonds.no with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16f2zi-0007mD-00 for ; Sun, 24 Feb 2002 19:03:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16f2xC-0002fA-00; Sun, 24 Feb 2002 13:00:54 -0500 Original-Received: from pele.santafe.edu ([192.12.12.119]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16f2uV-0002Qk-00; Sun, 24 Feb 2002 12:58:07 -0500 Original-Received: from aztec.santafe.edu (aztec [192.12.12.49]) by pele.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id g1OHw7u25588; Sun, 24 Feb 2002 10:58:07 -0700 (MST) Original-Received: (from rms@localhost) by aztec.santafe.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.9.3) id g1OHw1n15025; Sun, 24 Feb 2002 10:58:01 -0700 (MST) X-Authentication-Warning: aztec.santafe.edu: rms set sender to rms@aztec using -f Original-To: d.love@dl.ac.uk In-reply-to: (message from Dave Love on 23 Feb 2002 13:54:40 +0000) Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.5 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: quimby.gnus.org gmane.emacs.devel:1486 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:1486 Yes. One change checks for the necessary version of the jpeg library. The other defaults to not using libungif and tells you if it's found a copy that may be dangerous and that you have to enable it explicitly, knowing you have a suitable version. (I guess that's subject to problems if you run the binary on a system with a different shared library, but that's too bad.) I see. That sounds like maybe the right thing--people are talking about doing just that. I think none of us realized that your patch did this. Perhaps everyone else misunderstood the description just as I did. I just saw a suggestion that the existence of the function EGifPutExtensionLast will distinguish the newer version of libungif from the problematic one, but I can't currently check that. Can anyone else verify that? _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel