Re: Native compilation on Windows, was Re: Bootstrap Compilation Speed

[Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@russet.org.uk>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>> Actually, the "x86_64" is
>> not needed now, but I guess I left that in for backward compatibility.
>
> Why do you think the architecture subdirectory is not needed?


Because there is no i686 any more. You could install them both together.


>> In windows land, installing Emacs-28 would be expected to remove
>> Emacs-27.
>
> We are in Emacs-land, not in Windows-land.  Emacs on Windows tries to
> behave like on any other platform, from this POV.

Yes, that's true, but Emacs does not ship an installer on any other
platform. The Windows installer has to behave uniquely for that reasons.

Although, I would say that most of the binary packaged versions of Emacs
do the same thing. The debian .deb is a single version (27.1). A new
release will remove the old one.



>> If all older versions of Emacs get left behind, that would generally
>> be considered a bug.
>
> It is not a bug, it's a feature: old versions are still available
> after installing new ones.  If someone reports this as a bug, we will
> explain why it isn't.

You could:-) I'd agree with the bug report. But, as I have stepping back
from making the windows version, I'm easy with which ever way it goes.



>> So, side-by-side installation will work but it's not by design and while 
>> the installer supports it, the uninstaller will not respect it.
>
> Then the uninstaller needs to be fixed.


It doable, although with the directory layout as it is, it is slightly
more complex. If we want to do this, I would add a top level-directory
with the version number in. The uninstaller just deletes this. The start
menu items will need updating also, so there is not just one.


>> My feeling is, therefore, the current set up is correct. If you want to 
>> run multiple versions of Emacs, use the zip file.
>
> I disagree.  I think it will be confusing to have different
> installation expectations depending on whether a zip file or an
> installer were used.  They should both yield the same results.


The zip file doesn't bring any expectations. It just unpacks where every
you want it, and doesn't install any short cuts. You get the same Emacs
but all the directories are clearly different. In that sense, the zip
file is equivalent to a portable app. The installer version is not. The
latter is what most people would be expecting.

Phil