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: master cfcf42f 2/2: Ensure that gud commands for non-GDB debuggers are handled by repeat-mode Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 16:22:43 +0300 Message-ID: <83k0l8q6l8.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20210727211521.15408.98852@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20210727211523.AE6F72065F@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <877dhabg5s.fsf@gnus.org> <87zgu6h0e1.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87a6m6tn0e.fsf@gnus.org> <87r1figz3p.fsf@mail.linkov.net> <87zgu4ri8b.fsf@gnus.org> <837dh8s6fj.fsf@gnu.org> <87lf5oqdem.fsf@gnus.org> <83o8akqd0u.fsf@gnu.org> <87a6m4qcg5.fsf@gnus.org> <83mtq4q9s5.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnp8m1qy.fsf@gnus.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="13612"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, leungbk@mailfence.com, juri@linkov.net To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 30 15:24:50 2021 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 1m9SVN-0003NN-W2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 15:24:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56046 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m9SVM-00029w-R1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 09:24:48 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53588) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m9STu-0000eS-Ev for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 09:23:18 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:38502) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m9STr-0006aV-V7; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 09:23:15 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2259 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 1m9STp-0006Z5-Ko; Fri, 30 Jul 2021 09:23:15 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87wnp8m1qy.fsf@gnus.org> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Fri, 30 Jul 2021 14:20:53 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:271842 Archived-At: > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, juri@linkov.net, leungbk@mailfence.com, > emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2021 14:20:53 +0200 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > Generating loaddefs.el in a clean repository always reports a couple > > of prefixes it won't register, and for a good reason. > > It doesn't do that here -- perhaps it's in the Windows-specific bits? > (Stefan, Stefan and I fixed all those prefix warnings in the GNU Linux > build a few years ago, if I recall correctly.) Hmm... I rarely bootstrap, so I guess my memories are outdated. But "years ago" doesn't sound right to me -- could you tell which changes removed those "Not registering..." messages during the initial build? Anyway, if the intent is to fix any such message if and when it appears, seeing none of them as legitimate, then it's okay to make it a warning. > >> emake doesn't filter out everything that's a not a warning, so I don't > >> follow you here. > > > > Then I don't understand why you mentioned it. > > Because it filters out everything that's irrelevant. > > > Juri wants this to be a warning because evidently he disregards (or > > maybe actually filters out) anything that isn't a warning or an error > > message. That's why I said other messages are also worthy of us > > paying attention. > > I agree, but you said you had to read the output carefully, and I > pointed out that that's not necessary if you use admin/emake. Which means we are in violent agreement, right?