From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: ./make-dist for unicode branch Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:51:35 +0900 Message-ID: References: <87bqyasvv6.fsf@emfox.3322.org> Reply-To: Miles Bader NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1138672475 704 80.91.229.2 (31 Jan 2006 01:54:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 01:54:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eliz@gnu.org, EmfoxZhou@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jan 31 02:54:33 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F3kit-0004fI-5g for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 02:54:24 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F3kl2-0001oz-Jc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:56:36 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1F3kjH-0001cv-QR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:54:48 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1F3kjD-0001bu-RN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:54:46 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F3kjD-0001bl-5C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:54:43 -0500 Original-Received: from [66.249.92.200] (helo=uproxy.gmail.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1F3khb-0002sf-TC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:53:04 -0500 Original-Received: by uproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id m3so64905ugc for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 17:51:36 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=URDWuyLaUCpcZiQhk1u2JCVF6NXt6U5ZzBIchrScn2yfuFVmAw3ZKvdn3QQViFlGWpRJWdGVWhhpHNxPKzNWA5MqNWSHiqJN61rzcpM3YGCM7lTeEm0KfxUDwnEmWlNEp3+FeDXbG+USyi9uPWtSfhC/e6gahQffwt6Gq9h/iYo= Original-Received: by 10.49.20.3 with SMTP id x3mr936059nfi; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 17:51:36 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.48.1.9 with HTTP; Mon, 30 Jan 2006 17:51:35 -0800 (PST) Original-To: Kenichi Handa In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:49806 Archived-At: 2006/1/30, Kenichi Handa : > I thought that the point was to prevent making an incomplete > tarball. And, for that, it is necessary to detect the case > where bootstrap failed. The merit of just checking if > bootstrap was done or not regardless of the result is small, > isn't it? Why do you think that? I'd think by far the most common case would be people who checked out but didn't build (i.e. the easy-to-detect case). Emacs does not attempt to do a rigorous up-to-date check anywhere else, why should it do that here? That's especially true given the low frequency of changes in unicode data files -- if the generated files exist at all, they're probably good enough to use for a snapshot. -miles -- Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.