From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master 2c74924: * etc/MACHINES: Document that we support AArch64 with macOS. Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2021 17:06:44 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20210131185114.23801.85391@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20210131185115.B6A3C20DF3@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="37795"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Philipp Stephani , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alan Third Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 31 23:08:27 2021 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 1l6KtP-0009kM-0Z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 23:08:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59474 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l6KtO-0001Bf-34 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 17:08:26 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51252) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l6Krz-0000VJ-Gs for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 17:06:59 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:53865) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1l6Krx-0002mF-B9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 17:06:58 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D0999101136; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 17:06:55 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1E44110021D; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 17:06:47 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1612130807; bh=/MhIzBDHfUyO2miJU123nrT7t4AGAQcAy/C6K0Yk4rQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=APK53rcwsMHyo+QaT1DLZeWrxPcsEeM0dlMZ3pBnOVkCK+5D7AvH2K8fu9kLSZT2d T/zZeKKvT0dsPC3kEvvy9OHUsbwGekY5Wj3wAsNndk78euNV7GbP0J6H6Uy7q0H1jd YaCn1PMEUovi7pHYkrmodk0b6OWuWss5htI0j38mk9u77/WQV7n9col5vQOF4bVaG4 kGxECxwrVEVG0G4Pen77hDH1NB9aYj/hefa54zVPJMVjhcNPUjjXQUhwZhd27V9Mkw XL/uLxQoGT9ZbM13FlukWnOpEmkvPMgS33NkFXVmHGeBwtM1PB5zb1109KYIipeoaF je+ghf2uOa5sg== Original-Received: from alfajor (69-196-141-46.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.141.46]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E294812045A; Sun, 31 Jan 2021 17:06:46 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Alan Third's message of "Sun, 31 Jan 2021 20:37:39 +0000") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:263670 Archived-At: > Officially, yes, but some people apparently manage to run 10.6 on > powerPC. I don't know if we really need to specify that, though, given > that it's almost certainly a tiny subset of a tiny subset of people > running macOS, and they can't reasonably be expecting official support > for their project. Interesting. Makes me wonder, tho: why would Emacs not work on such a system? I understand that with the old unexec there was a good chance that it wouldn't work without explicit work on our part, but the "p" of "pdump" should avoid those problems ;-) Stefan