From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Android port of Emacs Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2023 15:18:27 +0000 Message-ID: <30832e8647c0d343f7d8@heytings.org> References: <83v8fnslfz.fsf@gnu.org> <83edmask4z.fsf@gnu.org> <5c02371a-3c42-de66-70b7-4ed0d88cc3fa@gutov.dev> <87cz1td0ku.fsf@yahoo.com> <87cz1ta5fr.fsf@telefonica.net> <87edm645yy.fsf@yahoo.com> <87mt0ryqlg.fsf@yahoo.com> <2aa76ba11fdd1c81b2f0@heytings.org> <87o7l6y2zf.fsf@yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="EmeveTqB1x" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="3568"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Po Lu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 26 17:19:25 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qDnzw-0000eN-IT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2023 17:19:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qDnz7-0006y4-39; Mon, 26 Jun 2023 11:18:33 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qDnz5-0006wE-2H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2023 11:18:31 -0400 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qDnz3-0006vu-Al for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Jun 2023 11:18:30 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20220101; t=1687792707; bh=YDUegUBq5UBAKdDesXSW0Y8TSkLVocKede79sghybC0=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=kDZjvRTEds+EulAMY09AapARWZnLZ/2cODVIOfmlzYa4jgqVDn3Rlhv3u2B/cunlh mQqOqgwqcl/caVIOtQoTSCp3QcfPqhlnx7HHNOamouhJhcqVBUIGdbogbxz2IBNsUK u8CAGPGTZUIftTh3V2HhRsz0LkhRFw4Redxs4wc382YKssF8p+Xxq0cxojCn5qHTmS XFFq9NRjkWHSXlnmvxER3Knaliws76HABuAjThBr95iFDuuZn8bO/PBKWbCnzLK4WA tZkvzpKOYnqbhNtSTr0n412hwzJy47g4hqGjyq77l7tUlJnTB79/WgafmpSTosqcQV yh5ICwgKQsezQ== In-Reply-To: <87o7l6y2zf.fsf@yahoo.com> Content-ID: <30832e8647877f6f638c@heytings.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=95.142.160.155; envelope-from=gregory@heytings.org; helo=heytings.org X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:307236 Archived-At: --EmeveTqB1x Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-ID: <30832e864746a17fb16e@heytings.org> >> If that process was as trivial as you say it is, distros would not=20 >> exist. Users will have to do that every time they want to upgrade their= =20 >> packages. And the same programs will be installed twice on their device= =20 >> (unless they want to use Emacs exclusively). > > And most users will wish to use Emacs exclusively: its features are much= =20 > richer than that of the Termux application. > It seems to me that you extrapolate too much from your own experience.=20 =C3=93scar, who started this subthread, now said both that the process of= =20 building the Termux packages is not at all "trivial" but rather "quite a=20 chore", and that he wants to continue to use Termux. Independently of his or mine experience, Emacs is, in any case, not=20 suitable replacement for GIMP or Audacity, for instance. >>> If you want to argue over this, I ask you to first describe in detail= =20 >>> the procedure used to execute binaries, and then how you propose to=20 >>> prevent it from being used, while keeping the ability to debug=20 >>> programs. >> >> I won't do that. I'm not a student and you're not a teacher here. > > Then the only conclusion I can reach is that what you said earlier was=20 > wrong. > The correct conclusion would have been that I don't want to play by your=20 "you should first demonstrate your technical knowledge before speaking=20 here" rule. >> Not only will Termux not have to adopt that "solution", but they=20 >> unequivocally said they will not do that, and they already have another= =20 >> solution, of which they say that it's the only correct solution. > > Their ``other solution'' is to rely on yet another feature obsoleted by= =20 > Android: sharing files between APK packages, using android:sharedUserId. > > [...] > > In fact, the approach I have taken is the only approach that Android has= =20 > not discouraged or decided to remove in the future. > There is a huge difference between using an obsoleted and discouraged, but= =20 still supported, feature, that merely "might be removed in a future=20 version of Android" (which does not mean "will be removed"), and using a=20 hack to directly violate the explicit "write xor execute" security policy. Despite the fact that it is obsoleted and discouraged, its intended use=20 (distributing an app with optional add-ons instead of distributing a large= =20 monolithic app) seems legitimate, so it is also possible (and IMO=20 probable) that if that feature is indeed removed at some point, another=20 mechanism to achieve the same goal will exist. (And yes, I am aware that= =20 other similar mechanisms already exist, but AFAIK you cannot achieve the=20 exact same goal with any of the already existing ones.) How can you believe that you alone know better, and unquestionably so,=20 than a whole team of developers, who have been working on the Android=20 platform and have been developing Termux for several years, and who=20 carefully considered (and publicly discussed) all alternative solutions,=20 including the one you have taken, before deciding which one they would=20 adopt? And, by the way, why do you provide an android-use-exec-loader variable to= =20 disable that hack, and do you explain in its docstring that it "may prove= =20 to be problematic for various different reasons", if it is indeed a good=20 solution? Its most obvious limit, apart from the overhead it introduces,= =20 is that, given that a ptrace'd process cannot ptrace'd again, it becomes=20 impossible to use a debugger with that hack. --EmeveTqB1x--