From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Paul Eggert Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Preview: portable dumper Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 01:16:17 -0800 Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: <2b4b38b8-9fb0-9fe9-2e1e-823aae7b84b1@cs.ucla.edu> References: <047a67ec-9e29-7e4e-0fb0-24c3e59b5886@dancol.org> <83zikjxt1j.fsf@gnu.org> <8360n6ruzu.fsf@gnu.org> <0839b53b-4607-144f-3746-db054a29c1cd@cs.ucla.edu> <83zikiqdu5.fsf@gnu.org> <834m2orkhn.fsf@gnu.org> <96a00b2f-4012-5e66-9d67-7644039600e2@cs.ucla.edu> <83lgw0pbmv.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1480583863 25417 195.159.176.226 (1 Dec 2016 09:17:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 09:17:43 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1 Cc: dancol@dancol.org, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 01 10:17:29 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cCNUe-0004Rk-IL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2016 10:17:28 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49031 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cCNUi-0007lV-75 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2016 04:17:32 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45029) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cCNTk-0007iq-TW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2016 04:16:36 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cCNTg-00044n-CE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Dec 2016 04:16:32 -0500 Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.68]:50168) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cCNTc-00042c-Cz; Thu, 01 Dec 2016 04:16:24 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE18516008D; Thu, 1 Dec 2016 01:16:21 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id pN7tyjIcLi9K; Thu, 1 Dec 2016 01:16:21 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CB5716008E; Thu, 1 Dec 2016 01:16:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id j_bfRQwjAfzU; Thu, 1 Dec 2016 01:16:20 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.9] (unknown [47.153.178.162]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DF84B16008D; Thu, 1 Dec 2016 01:16:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <83lgw0pbmv.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 131.179.128.68 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:209866 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii wrote: > Emacs never worked on that platform Sure it did. Emacs worked until FreeBSD 11, when the arm64 port modernize= d its=20 memory-management implementation. If Glibc does something similar, it wou= ld be a=20 mistake to say "that's OK, Emacs never worked on that platform", as this = might=20 give non-experts the misimpression that Emacs never worked on GNU/Linux. > they removed a certain library function, which happens to be called by = unexec. This was no accident. They removed it because it was producing bogus valu= es, and=20 it didn't reflect how FreeBSD actually allocates memory. Whether the func= tion=20 worked for Emacs at all was apparently a matter of luck. I would rather not tell FreeBSD/arm64 users that they can't run Emacs any= more=20 because we can't be bothered to install a patch that's been contributed, = not=20 even a patch that's compiled by default only on FreeBSD/arm64. I sympathize with Daniel about the politics of this. This is not the sort= of=20 change that we'd ordinarily create a new branch for, and the way this is = being=20 handled will likely discourage further contributions.