From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs vista build failures Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:22:45 +0200 Message-ID: <48890EC5.5030104@gmail.com> References: <36366a980807101702r5677d096g8e62ef5b3e278868@mail.gmail.com> <4eb0089f0807121340x5e26f6dbve03ef50b238f3a3a@mail.gmail.com> <87k5fph5rh.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <20080713214648.GB1076@muc.de> <20080714195651.GF3445@muc.de> <487C5FA3.4070603@emf.net> <87zloggji9.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <878wvxxkn6.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87ej5oz4pb.fsf@saeurebad.de> <87vdyzxype.fsf@saeurebad.de> <871w1njq32.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87iquzxgtk.fsf@saeurebad.de> <4884CFEF.8040404@gmail.com> <48861A51.1090401@gmail.com> <4887C77C.2090109@gmail.com> <48890184.40207@gmail.com> <18569.3341.149170.466548@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1216941805 8944 80.91.229.12 (24 Jul 2008 23:23:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 23:23:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Nick Roberts Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 25 01:24:13 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KMAAI-0000Cd-Bd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:24:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50772 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KMA9N-0003c1-EV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 19:23:09 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KMA9I-0003Xt-PF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 19:23:04 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KMA9G-0003Rz-SC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 19:23:04 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39758 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KMA9G-0003Rm-MP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 19:23:02 -0400 Original-Received: from ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net ([80.76.149.212]:58245) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KMA9E-00022I-TD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Jul 2008 19:23:02 -0400 Original-Received: from c83-254-151-176.bredband.comhem.se ([83.254.151.176]:63943 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net with esmtp (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1KMA9B-0001rz-4n; Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:22:57 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 In-Reply-To: <18569.3341.149170.466548@kahikatea.snap.net.nz> X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080724-1, 2008-07-24), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Originating-IP: 83.254.151.176 X-ACL-Warn: Too high rate of unknown addresses received from you X-Scan-Result: No virus found in message 1KMA9B-0001rz-4n. X-Scan-Signature: ch-smtp01.sth.basefarm.net 1KMA9B-0001rz-4n a18ccb82272014fc75120134ca54c448 X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6? (barebone, rare!) 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:101435 Archived-At: Nick Roberts wrote: > > One way to look into this question is perhaps to ask people developing > > software that runs on free systems where they have learned it and if it > > has been any help to them that these tools also runs on non-free systems. > > It's only worth asking these questions if a negative conclusion would mean that > people are going to stop working on/distributing Emacs on non-free systems. > Since they are probably not going to do that, it's probably best to just > have tolerance for one another. Don't you when you write this already assume that it is negative to work for free software development tools on Windows? Is not your conclusion already done then? I would say that if these questions are asked one might come to the conclusion that better support on non-free systems may promote free systems. I for one has found it quite irritating having to spend so much time trying to fix problems with Emacs on w32 instead of raising the level of Emacs in different areas. But it is difficult, or rather impossible, to draw final conclusions. You have to take into account many things. What one can hope for is that looking into the questions gives input for strategies to use.