Daniel Colascione schrieb am Mo., 18. Jan. 2016 um 21:05 Uhr: > On 01/18/2016 12:02 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > >> From: Paul Eggert > >> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 11:50:31 -0800 > >> > >> Emacs could live without the current unexec in a semi-portable way by > doing what > >> XEmacs does, which is to write out data and mmap it in later (sorry, > don't know > >> the details). There are other possibilities, e.g., have unexec write > out the > >> state in the form of C files that are compiled and linked in the usual > way to > >> build a faster-starting executable (this would be an Emacs API change, > though). > >> Any such changes would take some time to hack into something reliable > and > >> portable, and so will have to wait until after Emacs 25 is out. > > > > There's also what the MS-Windows port does (temacs allocates off a > > static array), which AFAIK is entirely portable, and doesn't require > > mmap. See w32heap.c. > > > > It's a portable stopgap, maybe, but a real portable dumper would be > _much_ better, since then Emacs could be a much safer > position-independnent executable (as a portable dumper would relocate > the dump as it loads, since it knows where all the pointers are). > > I completely agree. Also see the existing bugs https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=20215 and https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=20868. Does anybody have a rough estimate what would be required to make the dumper really portable?