From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.comp.lib.gnulib.bugs Subject: Re: Files from gnulib Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 06:01:34 +0200 Message-ID: <83ipxfymox.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83y66bzuhc.fsf@gnu.org> <4D3C81A1.70009@cs.ucla.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1295841691 11512 80.91.229.12 (24 Jan 2011 04:01:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 04:01:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, bug-gnulib@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 24 05:01:26 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PhDcM-0004xE-Im for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 05:01:26 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58864 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PhDcL-0005Tg-OJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 23 Jan 2011 23:01:25 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=40645 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PhDcF-0005Sg-4D for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Jan 2011 23:01:20 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PhDcE-0002dT-9V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 23 Jan 2011 23:01:19 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout21.012.net.il ([80.179.55.169]:32933) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PhDcB-0002cE-0W; Sun, 23 Jan 2011 23:01:15 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout21.012.net.il by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LFI00B00DR84L00@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 06:01:13 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.46.39]) by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LFI00AS7DTZXLA0@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 06:01:13 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:134883 gmane.comp.lib.gnulib.bugs:24881 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , bug-gnulib , emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2011 22:26:52 -0500 > > > The Emacs trunk already has seventeen other files > > with 2 dots in their file names, with names like > > lisp/gnus/.dir-locals.el > > I don't know how MSDOS handles names that start with dot, so either this > is a special case that's OK, or it's indeed a problem which we hadn't > noticed yet. The program used to unpack the .tar.gz archives automatically renames ant .FOO files to _FOO while unpacking, so that's not a problem. (This program, called djtar.exe, is part of the DJGPP package which is used to build Emacs on MSDOS.) > > and admin/charsets/mapfiles/symbol.txt.gz. > > This one, OTOH is OK because the `admin' subdir is not included in the > tarball, so its name is irrelevant. Right. > > Again, the Emacs trunk already has several instances of truncation > > after 8+3 limits, such as lisp/org/org-compat.el versus > > lisp/org/org-complete.el, > > Good point. I guess Eli hadn't noticed it yet. I did notice that. These files appeared very recently, and I didn't yet have time to talk to Org mode maintainers about renaming them. In the past a couple of other Org files were renamed for this reason, at my request. > > and test/cedet/semantic-ia-utest.el > > versus test/cedet/semantic-tests.el, and I don't see why > > files imported from gnulib would be different. > > Here, again, the `test' subdir is not included in the tarball, so it's > not an issue. Right.