From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Merging feature/android Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2023 09:25:31 +0200 Message-ID: <83ilficn4k.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87edq7ztks.fsf.ref@yahoo.com> <87edq7ztks.fsf@yahoo.com> <83pm9reccn.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8jjxxo9.fsf@yahoo.com> <835ybje2u5.fsf@gnu.org> <87fsanxoah.fsf@yahoo.com> <83zg8vckx5.fsf@gnu.org> <87bklay7wg.fsf@yahoo.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="25265"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, eggert@cs.ucla.edu To: Po Lu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 03 08:27:01 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 1pXzoh-0006Lk-Uw for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 03 Mar 2023 08:27:00 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pXznp-0003wI-EI; Fri, 03 Mar 2023 02:26:05 -0500 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 1pXznc-0003rn-K0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Mar 2023 02:25:55 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pXznb-0006Y1-JE; Fri, 03 Mar 2023 02:25:51 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=6ydcYhZjWS1LW+A6rLjRGoemRb33QTr0j9q+anHLn7g=; b=a5QRmEd6d0e3 zxmXq7d8rWSEq7c5RSCygcahLXCe8CdYagopfaeOVqFwhkJruNPBMoG67OezXS0SR5NQS/mCchR8y F2XTxb2D5/vXihQkiOIZhpZ687O9YCzfUXepUVzd1EFaM0IUw/6O3uqp7LSEN2PKpX9N1AoSSiZs3 o8HqZaFqgsTHwRrfW4anZLOkcU/7gC4H4a1D3MSnPgDhj8I0UdopdXu/NhAd89x8f4J2Sg5+gMrbS ejFclzX3mPAPWXlsYltjQKVrOkpRQ8gHCBs/MzgDLpEhivp/Mya7z+yxQePw88wkkSsaq9d/ZIi4z kW2Kd9FvcC3nvJw0Jkvr1Q==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pXznW-0005KW-Lj; Fri, 03 Mar 2023 02:25:51 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87bklay7wg.fsf@yahoo.com> (message from Po Lu on Fri, 03 Mar 2023 08:51:11 +0800) 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:303910 Archived-At: > From: Po Lu > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, eggert@cs.ucla.edu > Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2023 08:51:11 +0800 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > >> From: Po Lu > >> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, eggert@cs.ucla.edu > >> Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2023 21:42:30 +0800 > >> > >> Eli Zaretskii writes: > >> > >> > Rewriting the configury is OK, but that still doesn't need > >> > ifavailable, AFAIU. For example, we build with HarfBuzz if that is > >> > available, but we don't use ifavailable for it. How is this one > >> > different? > >> > >> Well, it would be a nasty shock for someone to configure --with-modules, > >> and not get an error when dynamic modules cannot be used. > > > > I'm talking about the default case, where there's no --with-modules > > option explicitly in the configure command line. If the user does > > explicitly asks for modules, then emitting an error message is > > reasonable. But if the user didn't ask for that explicitly, why not > > silently disable the feature, like we do with HarfBuzz and others? > > The HarfBuzz check doesn't behave that way, since it doesn't use > ifavailable. ``--with-modules'' does, however. I don't understand your reasoning, and more importantly, I don't understand the conclusion. Do you agree that ifavailable shouldn't be needed in this case? If not, please explain more, because I don't think I understand what you say above.