From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ken Brown Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: New emacs maintainer for cygwin Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 13:37:16 -0400 Message-ID: <4A143FCC.1030004@cornell.edu> References: <4A0D7111.7090800@cornell.edu> <83ljoyqwmn.fsf@gnu.org> <4A134CFB.7070403@cornell.edu> <4A136D6F.20903@cornell.edu> 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 1242841789 15879 80.91.229.12 (20 May 2009 17:49:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 17:49:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed May 20 19:49:42 2009 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 1M6pvB-0006oC-FV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 20 May 2009 19:49:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52073 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M6pvA-0001Wj-R1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 20 May 2009 13:49:40 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M6pjJ-0001DQ-06 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 May 2009 13:37:25 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M6pjD-0001AG-E4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 May 2009 13:37:23 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35984 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M6pjC-0001A4-UZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 May 2009 13:37:19 -0400 Original-Received: from granite1.mail.cornell.edu ([128.253.83.141]:39770 helo=authusersmtp.mail.cornell.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M6pjA-0004kF-TS; Wed, 20 May 2009 13:37:17 -0400 Original-Received: from [128.84.234.191] (markov.math.cornell.edu [128.84.234.191]) (authenticated bits=0) by authusersmtp.mail.cornell.edu (8.13.1/8.12.10) with ESMTP id n4KHbFMk015038 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 20 May 2009 13:37:15 -0400 (EDT) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 9 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:110999 Archived-At: On 5/20/2009 11:22 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> Could you elaborate on this? I don't know anything about USE_LSB_TAG. All > > grep for USE_LSB_TAG in src/lisp.h. It's quite likely that Cygwin uses > it already (ideally, all systems should use it). That does seem to be the case, if I understand src/lisp.h correctly. I'm using gcc, so __GNUC__ is defined, and src/config.h contains #define GNU_MALLOC 1. This should guarantee that USE_LSB_TAG is being used. Right? I therefore propose the following patch to src/s/cygwin.h, which is a slightly modified version of the one I sent yesterday: --- cygwin.h.orig 2009-05-20 13:30:27.062500000 -0400 +++ cygwin.h 2009-05-20 13:31:17.140625000 -0400 @@ -105,11 +105,7 @@ #define SYSV_SYSTEM_DIR 1 #define UNEXEC unexcw.o #define POSIX_SIGNALS 1 -/* force the emacs image to start high in memory, so dll relocation - can put things in low memory without causing all sorts of grief for - emacs lisp pointers */ -#define DATA_SEG_BITS 0x20000000 -#define LINKER $(CC) -Wl,--image-base,DATA_SEG_BITS +#define LINKER $(CC) /* Use terminfo instead of termcap. Fewer environment variables to go wrong, more terminal types. */ I realize that this patch does not fix a regression from emacs 22.3, so maybe it should wait until after 23.1 is released. But it affect only the cygwin build, and it would simplify my task of patching etc/PROBLEMS if it could be applied soon. Ken