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: MPS: Win64 testers? Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2024 19:07:32 +0300 Message-ID: <864j81vbcr.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86ttg9zgpb.fsf@gnu.org> <86h6c8zbh8.fsf@gnu.org> <86ikwly80l.fsf@gnu.org> <875xsixcxw.fsf@protonmail.com> <86frrmufh4.fsf@gnu.org> <87h6c1ws8n.fsf@protonmail.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="28455"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org To: pipcet@protonmail.com Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 03 18:08:30 2024 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 1saHIz-0007Fc-EA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 03 Aug 2024 18:08:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1saHIF-0006ru-6Z; Sat, 03 Aug 2024 12:07:43 -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 1saHIE-0006rk-1w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Aug 2024 12:07:42 -0400 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 1saHID-0008Bl-Os; Sat, 03 Aug 2024 12:07:41 -0400 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=Gf58sn4X+4n/pbtP+kP59qnhmrG4T/L8UuCBvt8jFYk=; b=cGUxUmAlDyxz gb0V50Zr1auaI306jbCW7uVg0iCVoB8k33qc1I68HgUO29eF3jQza2az8mkI7om8m+bg3hYFfB1jG mBrVOC4oVYeQnjiiJQfoeSGCfOM2EAP5itlVAGmJBI4ZJrtzFvxS2Rz9RlxzWc6uRs76tc0BHh3BJ Ttn23opqOMxZoYH7j5KTLIIJhhjL11y/sD4JQfCCOpEPX/e53jw4Bjxm7o797mcA6MHXnbYNWezx2 77jpIDU43pwt3aC4xrbBdqx1+/hl8NHNAa4dt+phTc6/RQx97eJ48j1qgF+CXM3wG794j/+wJySLK 5vFN5CccldwFY8Y/9TagyQ==; In-Reply-To: <87h6c1ws8n.fsf@protonmail.com> (pipcet@protonmail.com) 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:322314 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2024 15:17:31 +0000 > From: pipcet@protonmail.com > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, rms@gnu.org > > "Eli Zaretskii" writes: > > > It isn't an entirely different port, no. The code commonality between > > the two is close to 100%, and so is the functionality, the only > > difference is that one is 32-bit, the other 64-bit. > > What I meant was that building according to the nt/INSTALL instructions > will produce something people won't be happy with, with very rare > exceptions, because it uses an entirely different toolchain, produces a > 32-bit binary, and doesn't support as many features for a naive build > (such as native compilation). No, the MinGW build supports all the features when it runs on the same system as the MinGW64 build. That includes native compilation (I have it enabled in all my production builds, including the one where I'm typing this, which is a 32-bit MinGW build with large-ints). > As for the test person issue, would it be possible to start a new thread > on emacs-devel with a detailed call for volunteers for testing Emacs on > 64-bit versions of Microsoft Windows? I already did that, see https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2024-07/msg01072.html Feel free to post there with the additional bits about UCRT. This is not the first time I post about the need for UCRT support, either, there were a couple of discussions in the past. IOW, it isn't like the issue isn't known. > Maybe it would also help to offer people the chance to respond by > private email rather than on the list? Why? the job is definitely a public one, it cannot be done in private email.