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: Solaris dldump Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 15:55:03 +0300 Message-ID: <86bk1oy8ns.fsf@gnu.org> References: <878qwuitbu.fsf@yahoo.com> <6b0199db-60e3-4a41-8481-414688db0e18@emvision.com> <87ttfihbbn.fsf@yahoo.com> <87h6bhgzc2.fsf@yahoo.com> <87plq4enze.fsf@protonmail.com> <87cym4hgil.fsf@yahoo.com> <87h6bgems9.fsf@protonmail.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="13278"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: luangruo@yahoo.com, stefankangas@gmail.com, ali_gnu2@emvision.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Pip Cet Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 19 14:56:23 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 1sg1vr-0003JN-44 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 19 Aug 2024 14:56:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sg1v6-0001xN-Qb; Mon, 19 Aug 2024 08:55:36 -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 1sg1uz-0001wq-OP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Aug 2024 08:55:31 -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 1sg1uw-0004zB-Pt; Mon, 19 Aug 2024 08:55:29 -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=YlmX6uA7TkylQSJbhJqBDsyv58YBwjQ+GVmftsJRGZU=; b=VZjDtVdp9kBq YcafWnIKdoWInZbUt1CIWGkbAt48vSg1jB54eiMRUAmU/Zm6NOliS/lOPlsRi7hhFFkKOaASOJXw2 tdaPAgb4vub6EDt3EEbr60xwG9riUTLIha2ytvR9LPcFC1rVqWdbmFUC11xstjYV015uxw/jGpazC LLwIRuCx0WDQqK0kyT3VQkkSW9vFEBqJEB2bZr1aUSufk3cA8xke1kGDxrINxyImNOetwSOUXXa3V orw99HE/pZ/WWCAZ/MYSeNbtqnvx2aXtzIHXlg09NFWJEO+yq9BVbmkYSQFRW9HE1H10MrM+Sxo6z msAIt6gK14n1TNamrE4NdQ==; In-Reply-To: <87h6bgems9.fsf@protonmail.com> (message from Pip Cet on Mon, 19 Aug 2024 12:10:19 +0000) 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:322918 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 12:10:19 +0000 > From: Pip Cet > Cc: Stefan Kangas , ali_gnu2@emvision.com, > emacs-devel@gnu.org > > "Po Lu" writes: > > Pip Cet writes: > >> Wait, I'm not sure I understand that part. How does removing pure space > >> burden anyone with additional labor, hypothetical or not? > > > > Isn't this theoretical burden the reason that pure space is not to be > > removed except along with unexec? > > Maybe a compromise would be to keep unexec but put it on probation, > promising to remove it if problems arise that cannot be convincingly and > immediately fixed? That'd just add to code churn and maintenance burden. So I prefer removing it to begin with. > > Anyway, I want pure space gone as much as any of us, I just don't agree > > that taking unexec down with it is justified. Maybe the ELF, XCOFF, and > > Windows unexecs, but not the Solaris or DOS ones. > > DOS in particular is what triggered my question: given the limitations > of DOS systems, it's quite possible temacs-as-emacs just wouldn't fly on > those machines. Those limitations are not relevant in our case. But this all is besides the point.