New pretest tarball 22.0.93

New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Chong Yidong]

It's been more than a month since 22.0.92, and the bugs are becoming
rather thin on the ground.  So I have made a new pretest tarball.  It
can be found at the usual location:

ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-22.0.93.tar.gz
ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-22.0.92-22.0.93.xdelta

Cheerio.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

Chong Yidong wrote:
> It's been more than a month since 22.0.92, and the bugs are becoming
> rather thin on the ground.  So I have made a new pretest tarball.  It
> can be found at the usual location:
> 
> ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-22.0.93.tar.gz
> ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-22.0.92-22.0.93.xdelta
> 
> Cheerio.


I have uploaded new unpatched (unofficial) binaries compiled from CVS 
some hours ago (after the new pretest tarball was released):

   http://ourcomments.org/cgi-bin/emacsw32-dl-latest.pl

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[David Hansen]

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 14:40:45 +0100 Lennart Borgman wrote:

>   http://ourcomments.org/cgi-bin/emacsw32-dl-latest.pl

Tsk, it says I'm using IE even though i use emacs-w3m and
WWWoffle.

David

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

David Hansen wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 14:40:45 +0100 Lennart Borgman wrote:
> 
>>   http://ourcomments.org/cgi-bin/emacsw32-dl-latest.pl
> 
> Tsk, it says I'm using IE even though i use emacs-w3m and
> WWWoffle.
> 
> David


Maybe the Mozilla people are too afraid of IE? ;-)

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Jason Rumney]

Lennart Borgman (gmail) wrote:
> I have uploaded new unpatched (unofficial) binaries compiled from CVS 
> some hours ago (after the new pretest tarball was released):
Why not upload binaries that are built from the pretest sources?

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

Jason Rumney wrote:
> Lennart Borgman (gmail) wrote:
>> I have uploaded new unpatched (unofficial) binaries compiled from CVS 
>> some hours ago (after the new pretest tarball was released):
> Why not upload binaries that are built from the pretest sources?


I have it all setup for automatic fetching-building-uploading of what I 
upload now. And I thought that someone else would probably upload 
binaries built from the tarball. The value with my uploads are perhaps 
that they are done frequently (most of the time).

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 1/23/07, Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com> wrote:

> It's been more than a month since 22.0.92, and the bugs are becoming
> rather thin on the ground.

Absolutely non-relevant info ("Diff" and "Acc" are days):

Release   Date        Dif   Acc  Comments
--------- ----------  ---  ----  -------------------
21.0.90   2000-11-17
21.0.91   2000-11-19    2     2
21.0.92   2000-11-29   10    12
21.0.93   2000-12-12   13    25
21.0.94   2000-12-18    6    31
21.0.95   2001-01-10   23    54
21.0.96   2001-01-28   13    67
21.0.97   2001-01-30    2    69
21.0.98   2001-02-15   16    85
21.0.99   2001-03-05   18   103
21.0.100  2001-03-14    9   112
21.0.101  2001-04-05   22   134
21.0.102  2001-04-06    1   135
21.0.103  2001-05-08   33   168
21.0.104  2001-07-13   66   234
21.0.105  2001-08-31   49   283
21.0.106  2001-09-25   25   308
21.1      2001-10-20   25   333  Official release

22.0.90   2006-10-27
22.0.91   2006-11-18   22    22
22.0.92   2006-12-19   31    53
22.0.93   2007-01-23   35    88  Current pretest

I sure hope we don't need 17 pretests and 333 days to release 22.1 ;-)

As a curiosity, assuming we were able to release 22.1 in 2007-03-01,
we'd have the following ("Prev" and "21.1" are in years):

Release  Date        Dif   Acc  Prev  21.1  Comment
-------  ----------  ---  ----  ----  ----  ------------
21.1     2001-10-20
21.2     2002-03-16  147   147  0.40  0.40
21.3     2003-03-18  367   514  1.01  1.41
21.4     2005-02-26  711  1225  1.95  3.36
22.1 ??  2007-03-01  733  1958  2.01  5.36  Estimate

That'd be two full years since 21.4 and about 5 1/3 since 21.1.

> So I have made a new pretest tarball.  It
> can be found at the usual location:
>
> ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-22.0.93.tar.gz

Has that been announced to pretesters? If the answer is yes, that
means I'm still out of that list :(

                    /L/e/k/t/u

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 13:30:00 +0100
> From: "Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com>
> Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> I sure hope we don't need 17 pretests and 333 days to release 22.1 ;-)

Emacs 21.1 was a major rewrite of the display engine, that's one
reason why it took so long to release.  Emacs 22.1 doesn't come
anywhere near that revolution.

> > ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-22.0.93.tar.gz
> 
> Has that been announced to pretesters?

No.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 1/26/07, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

> Emacs 21.1 was a major rewrite of the display engine, that's one
> reason why it took so long to release.

I know, I wasn't a developer back then but I pretested each and every
one of these seventeen tarballs (painstakingly downloading them with a
56K modem because I had no working xdelta) :)

But I wasn't really trying to establish a comparison. It's just that I
love that kind of procrastinating, navel-gazing, idle info collecting.

> Emacs 22.1 doesn't come anywhere near that revolution.

Sure. And yet, we're already 91 days into the pretest.

> No.

Well, that's not gonna make things faster ;-)

                    /L/e/k/t/u

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 16:22:12 +0100
> From: "Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com>
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> > Emacs 22.1 doesn't come anywhere near that revolution.
> 
> Sure. And yet, we're already 91 days into the pretest.

4 pretest tarballs is not too many, I think.

> > No.
> 
> Well, that's not gonna make things faster ;-)

I wonder on how many platforms was this pretest built and tested.  I
don't think we have that information; during the pretest of Emacs 21,
I think many pretesters would send email short time after another
pretest was tarred, saying they have the new version up and running.
Perhaps we should ask them to provide this information now.
Otherwise, we really have no idea how well the pretest is tested, in
comparison to how the CVS code normally is.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 1/26/07, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

> 4 pretest tarballs is not too many, I think.

No, of course not. I'm more worried by the month-long interval between
pretests than the number of them. 30 days is enough for us to grow
restless and leave us susceptible to featurettes posing as
bug-fixes... (I have this mental image of us developers like the guys
in Starship Troopers, surrounded by nasty, mean-looking bugs.)

> during the pretest of Emacs 21,
> I think many pretesters would send email short time after another
> pretest was tarred, saying they have the new version up and running.
> Perhaps we should ask them to provide this information now.

Agreed.

                    /L/e/k/t/u

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Chong Yidong]

"Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:

> On 1/26/07, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> > 4 pretest tarballs is not too many, I think.
> 
> No, of course not. I'm more worried by the month-long interval between
> pretests than the number of them.

The main reason for this is that Richard has, in the past, insisted on
eliminating outstanding bugs before starting a new pretest.  So I have
waited for the items in FOR-RELEASE items to be depleted before
rolling a new tarball.  There is certainly no difficulty for me to
roll a tarball every week if we decide on that.

> No, of course not. I'm more worried by the month-long interval between
> pretests than the number of them. 30 days is enough for us to grow
> restless and leave us susceptible to featurettes posing as
> bug-fixes... (I have this mental image of us developers like the guys
> in Starship Troopers, surrounded by nasty, mean-looking bugs.)

If we were to release Emacs 22 right now, it would already be much
more polished than the average free software release.  Personally, I
think that at this point, getting 5 years of accumulated crash and
data-corruption bugfixes into users' hands is more important that
scraping through the remaining handful of niggly bugs left in the
code---that ought to be what 22.2 is for.  But we've been through this
discussion before.

> > during the pretest of Emacs 21,
> > I think many pretesters would send email short time after another
> > pretest was tarred, saying they have the new version up and running.
> > Perhaps we should ask them to provide this information now.
> 
> Agreed.

One problem is Richard's time-lag.  He has to receive my email through
emacs-devel about the pretest tarball, then send the email to the
pretesters list, which usually takes several days.  I could send out
the pretest email directly if that makes things easier.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 26 Jan 2007 12:35:28 -0500, Chong Yidong <cyd@mit.edu> wrote:

> There is certainly no difficulty for me to
> roll a tarball every week if we decide on that.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not complaining; I appreciate the effort.

Moreover, just being into the pretest stage makes me insanely happy :)

> Personally, I
> think that at this point, getting 5 years of accumulated crash and
> data-corruption bugfixes into users' hands is more important that
> scraping through the remaining handful of niggly bugs left in the
> code

Agreed. Though we need to apply the patch that allows turning
print-circle checking off for some files; and also reach a decision
regarding the auto-detection of images.

                    /L/e/k/t/u

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Richard Stallman]

    Agreed. Though we need to apply the patch that allows turning
    print-circle checking off for some files; and also reach a decision
    regarding the auto-detection of images.

We have already turned that off, right?

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 1/27/07, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:

>     Agreed. Though we need to apply the patch that allows turning
>     print-circle checking off for some files; and also reach a decision
>     regarding the auto-detection of images.
>

> We have already turned that off, right?

AFAICS, Kenichi's patch to turn off print-circle in some files is not installed.

And certainly the stuff to start images in image-minor-mode and
disable `image-toggle-display' is *not* installed either. It's
trivial, but I'm not happy with using `magic-mode-alist' to set a
minor mode... It contradicts both the documentation and current
expectations.

                    /L/e/k/t/u

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Richard Stallman]

    And certainly the stuff to start images in image-minor-mode and
    disable `image-toggle-display' is *not* installed either.

So what are people waiting for?
Doesn't anyone want to make progress towards the release?

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 1/28/07, Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> wrote:

> So what are people waiting for?
> Doesn't anyone want to make progress towards the release?

What's that? Rhetoric 101?

I've spelled out clearly why I haven't installed the image-minor-mode stuff.

                    /L/e/k/t/u

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Frank Schmitt]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> I wonder on how many platforms was this pretest built and tested.

I know that it builds on

i386 	
ia64 	
ppc 	
ppc64 
s390 	
s390x 
x86_64

in Fedoras build system (development version of Fedora). They don't
apply any patches but only add some additional lisp files.

-- 
Did you ever realize how much text fits in eighty columns? If you now consider
that a signature usually consists of up to four lines, this gives you enough
space to spread a tremendous amount of information with your messages. So seize
this opportunity and don't waste your signature with bullshit nobody will read.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Romain Francoise]

Frank Schmitt <ich@frank-schmitt.net> writes:

> I know that it builds on

> i386
> ia64
> ppc
> ppc64
> s390
> s390x
> x86_64

> in Fedoras build system (development version of Fedora).

FWIW, it also builds successfully on the following archs on Debian
unstable:

  alpha amd64 arm hppa i386 ia64 mips mipsel powerpc s390 sparc
  kfreebsd-i386

(CVS Emacs is built on those archs on a weekly basis.)

It doesn't build on m68k but that's probably caused by toolchain
issues because CVS Emacs has never built on it, and until very
recently Emacs 21 failed to bootstrap too.

-- 
Romain Francoise <romain@orebokech.com> | The sea! the sea! the open
it's a miracle -- http://orebokech.com/ | sea! The blue, the fresh, the
                                        | ever free! --Bryan W. Procter

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Richard Stallman]

    It doesn't build on m68k but that's probably caused by toolchain
    issues because CVS Emacs has never built on it, and until very
    recently Emacs 21 failed to bootstrap too.

We are dependent on users of that system to make Emacs work on it.
If someone might be interested, now would be a very good time to do it!

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Romain Francoise <romain@orebokech.com>
> Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2007 00:17:50 +0100
> 
> FWIW, it also builds successfully on the following archs on Debian
> unstable:
> 
>   alpha amd64 arm hppa i386 ia64 mips mipsel powerpc s390 sparc
>   kfreebsd-i386
> 
> (CVS Emacs is built on those archs on a weekly basis.)

Thanks.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Yavor Doganov]

В Sat, 27 Jan 2007 00:17:50 +0100, Romain Francoise написа:

> FWIW, it also builds successfully on the following archs on Debian
> unstable:
> 
>   alpha amd64 arm hppa i386 ia64 mips mipsel powerpc s390 sparc
>   kfreebsd-i386

It builds on GNU/Hurd as well.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Frank Schmitt <ich@frank-schmitt.net>
> Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 21:15:02 +0100
> 
> I know that it builds on
> 
> i386 	
> ia64 	
> ppc 	
> ppc64 
> s390 	
> s390x 
> x86_64
> 
> in Fedoras build system (development version of Fedora). They don't
> apply any patches but only add some additional lisp files.

Thanks for the feedback.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Giorgos Keramidas]

On 2007-01-27 12:26, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> > From: Frank Schmitt <ich@frank-schmitt.net>
> > Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 21:15:02 +0100
> >
> > I know that it builds on
> >
> > i386
> > ia64
> > ppc
> > ppc64
> > s390
> > s390x
> > x86_64
> >
> > in Fedoras build system (development version of Fedora). They don't
> > apply any patches but only add some additional lisp files.
>
> Thanks for the feedback.

FWIW, I've successfully built a CVS snapshot of Emacs on:

  FreeBSD/i386
  Solaris/i386
  Solaris/amd64 (32-bit binaries)

But I have only tested the binaries with Lucid widgets.  I don't know if
the same versions work fine with GTK+ widgets yet.

I haven't had a chance to download a 22.0.93 tarball either, but an
update to the editors/emacs-devel port has been submitted, so I will try
to do this later today.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Giorgos Keramidas]

On 2007-01-28 07:27, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> wrote:
> FWIW, I've successfully built a CVS snapshot of Emacs on:
>
>   FreeBSD/i386
>   Solaris/i386
>   Solaris/amd64 (32-bit binaries)
>
> But I have only tested the binaries with Lucid widgets.  I don't know if
> the same versions work fine with GTK+ widgets yet.
>
> I haven't had a chance to download a 22.0.93 tarball either, but an
> update to the editors/emacs-devel port has been submitted, so I will try
> to do this later today.

An 22.0.93 pretest tarball builds fine on the same set of systems
with Lucid widgets too.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Giorgos Keramidas]

On 2007-01-29 20:59, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> wrote:
>On 2007-01-28 07:27, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> wrote:
>> FWIW, I've successfully built a CVS snapshot of Emacs on:
>>
>>   FreeBSD/i386
>>   Solaris/i386
>>   Solaris/amd64 (32-bit binaries)
>>
>> But I have only tested the binaries with Lucid widgets.  I don't know if
>> the same versions work fine with GTK+ widgets yet.
>>
>> I haven't had a chance to download a 22.0.93 tarball either, but an
>> update to the editors/emacs-devel port has been submitted, so I will try
>> to do this later today.
> 
> An 22.0.93 pretest tarball builds fine on the same set of systems
> with Lucid widgets too.

FWIW, the 22.0.93 pretest version is also part of the FreeBSD Ports
Collection now, thanks to Andrey Slusar (a FreeBSD ports committer
who helps me maintain the ports/editors/emacs-devel FreeBSD port).

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Sascha Wilde]

Frank Schmitt <ich@frank-schmitt.net> wrote:

> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> I wonder on how many platforms was this pretest built and tested.

Just tested:
NetBSD 3.0.1 on i386

sascha
-- 
Sascha Wilde : "Der Nicht-Denkende glaubt, dass niemand denkt,
             : der Denkende weiss es!"
             : (Gabriel Laub)

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Sascha Wilde <wilde@sha-bang.de>
> Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 18:23:12 +0100
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> > Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> >
> >> I wonder on how many platforms was this pretest built and tested.
> 
> Just tested:
> NetBSD 3.0.1 on i386

Thanks.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Sascha Wilde]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

>> From: Sascha Wilde <wilde@sha-bang.de>
>> Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 18:23:12 +0100
>> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> 
>> > Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> >
>> >> I wonder on how many platforms was this pretest built and tested.

FWIW:
powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0 looks good, too.

(tested without X, cause I don't have X11 development stuff on that system.)

cheers
sascha
-- 
Sascha Wilde : The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one
             : that heralds new discoveries, is not "Eureka!" (I found
             : it!) but "That's funny ..." -- Isaac Asimov

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Sascha Wilde]

Sascha Wilde <wilde@sha-bang.de> wrote:

> FWIW:
> powerpc-ibm-aix5.1.0.0 looks good, too.
>
> (tested without X, cause I don't have X11 development stuff on that system.)

Further tests without X:

SunOS 5.8 (Solaris 8) on Sparc:
builds and works good
(btw. about 6 hours bootstrap time on my SS-10 with 40MHz Supersparc)

HP-UX 10.20 on PA-Risc:
builds ok, but segfaults when trying to run  :-(

I might further debug this later, but I don't have a gdb on he system
right now and everything takes quite some time on this box (715/50
with only 64 MiB Ram, bootstrap took nearly 9 hours).  :-)

cheers
sascha
-- 
Sascha Wilde
Hauptfunktion einer GUI ist es IMHO, die dadurch verlorene Zeit durch
einen höheren Spaß-Faktor zu kompensieren. Essentiell ein
Computerspiel.  --  Rainer Weikusat in d.c.o.u.d

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Chong Yidong]

Sascha Wilde <wilde@sha-bang.de> writes:

> HP-UX 10.20 on PA-Risc:
> builds ok, but segfaults when trying to run  :-(

Support was recently removed for HP 800 series servers running HP-UX.
Maybe this is because of that.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Richard Stallman]

    > HP-UX 10.20 on PA-Risc:
    > builds ok, but segfaults when trying to run  :-(

    Support was recently removed for HP 800 series servers running HP-UX.
    Maybe this is because of that.

It is too bad we had to remove unexhp9k800.c.  We could not find
anything to show that the copyright had been assigned to the FSF.  If
someone can determine that it has been, then we could bring the file
back.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Christian Faulhammer]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 240 bytes --]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>:
> I wonder on how many platforms was this pretest built and tested.

 It is in the tree for Gentoo and up to now there were no complains
about it (ran and built here fine, Gentoo is source-based).

V-Li

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Kevin Rodgers]

Juanma Barranquero wrote:
> On 1/26/07, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> 
>> Emacs 21.1 was a major rewrite of the display engine, that's one
>> reason why it took so long to release.
> 
> I know, I wasn't a developer back then but I pretested each and every
> one of these seventeen tarballs (painstakingly downloading them with a
> 56K modem because I had no working xdelta) :)

I don't have a working xdelta now, on Mac OS X (10.4.8).

-- 
Kevin Rodgers
Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 1/30/07, Kevin Rodgers <kevin.d.rodgers@gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't have a working xdelta now, on Mac OS X (10.4.8).

I don't think it is really needed now, in this time of high-bandwidth
internet connections, unless you happen to have a really slow
provider. I've got a 4Mb link from home; downloading the full tarball
is a matter of seconds...

                    /L/e/k/t/u

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Frank Schmitt]

"Juanma Barranquero" <lekktu@gmail.com> writes:

> On 1/30/07, Kevin Rodgers <kevin.d.rodgers@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I don't have a working xdelta now, on Mac OS X (10.4.8).
>
> I don't think it is really needed now, in this time of high-bandwidth
> internet connections, unless you happen to have a really slow
> provider. I've got a 4Mb link from home; downloading the full tarball
> is a matter of seconds...

Remember that the situation is worse in less developed countries and
rural areas, where dial-up lines are still common. (Would I live 50
meters farther from the telecom switching center, my best bet would be
64k ISDN. I feel lucky for having access to 384k DSL.)

-- 
Did you ever realize how much text fits in eighty columns? If you now consider
that a signature usually consists of up to four lines, this gives you enough
space to spread a tremendous amount of information with your messages. So seize
this opportunity and don't waste your signature with bullshit nobody will read.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Stefan Monnier]

>>> Emacs 21.1 was a major rewrite of the display engine, that's one
>>> reason why it took so long to release.
>> 
>> I know, I wasn't a developer back then but I pretested each and every
>> one of these seventeen tarballs (painstakingly downloading them with a
>> 56K modem because I had no working xdelta) :)

> I don't have a working xdelta now, on Mac OS X (10.4.8).

Which is why I always favored patches over xdelta (I used to provide
patches for pretests, a long time ago).  Also gzipped patches tend to
be somewhat shorter.


        Stefan

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Kevin Rodgers <kevin.d.rodgers@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 01:03:43 -0700
> 
> I don't have a working xdelta now, on Mac OS X (10.4.8).

It shouldn't be a problem to build one.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Richard Stallman]

No one coordinated these pretests with me, so I did not send mail to
the pretest list.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
> Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 19:46:28 -0500
> Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> No one coordinated these pretests with me, so I did not send mail to
> the pretest list.

I suggest that you give the master list of emacs-pretesters to Chong
Yidong, and tell him how you mail announcements to the pretesters.
There's no reason these announcements should be sent only by you, and
no justification (IMO) for special coordination for sending them.

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Ralf Angeli]

* Chong Yidong (2007-01-23) writes:

> So I have made a new pretest tarball.

Builds and installs fine on i386, Windows XP, MSYS shell, MinGW make
and gcc.  The build (with AUCTeX included) can be downloaded from
<URL:ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/auctex/>.

-- 
Ralf

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[Andreas Roehler]

GNU Emacs 22.0.93.1 (i686-pc-linux-gnu, X toolkit, Xaw3d scroll bars) of 
2007-01-30

successfully built with Suse 10.0

Thanks

__
Andreas Roehler


Chong Yidong schrieb:
> It's been more than a month since 22.0.92, and the bugs are becoming
> rather thin on the ground.  So I have made a new pretest tarball.  It
> can be found at the usual location:
>
> ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-22.0.93.tar.gz
> ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-22.0.92-22.0.93.xdelta
>
> Cheerio.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-devel mailing list
> Emacs-devel@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
>
>   

Re: New pretest tarball 22.0.93

[David Kastrup]

Andreas Roehler <andreas.roehler@easy-emacs.de> writes:

> GNU Emacs 22.0.93.1 (i686-pc-linux-gnu, X toolkit, Xaw3d scroll bars)
> of 2007-01-30
>
> successfully built with Suse 10.0

So how about aiming for a release by the end of the week?

-- 
David Kastrup