From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Paul Eggert Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lib.gnulib.bugs,gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: syncing Emacs from sources maintained elsewhere Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 01:22:42 -0800 Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: <4D413962.4060603@cs.ucla.edu> References: <4D2BA939.5090903@cs.ucla.edu> <4D34A88F.4080400@cs.ucla.edu> <4D35D842.5030003@cs.ucla.edu> <83wrlvztda.fsf@gnu.org> <4D3C91E2.3010007@cs.ucla.edu> <83fwsjymcw.fsf@gnu.org> <4D3E0FCE.9040908@cs.ucla.edu> <838vy7y8jz.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1296120187 1174 80.91.229.12 (27 Jan 2011 09:23:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 09:23:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bug-gnulib@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnulib-bounces+gnu-bug-gnulib=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 27 10:23:03 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gnu-bug-gnulib@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PiO4E-0001Sj-NG for gnu-bug-gnulib@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 10:23:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54341 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PiO4E-0007Nk-2B for gnu-bug-gnulib@m.gmane.org; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 04:23:02 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=35845 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PiO3x-0007MY-TL for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 04:22:46 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PiO3w-00008c-UY for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 04:22:45 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.62]:41167) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PiO3w-00008U-Ld; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 04:22:44 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 486B339E80F5; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 01:22:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smtp.cs.ucla.edu Original-Received: from smtp.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DzGrQTjGpHx2; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 01:22:42 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.10] (pool-71-189-109-235.lsanca.fios.verizon.net [71.189.109.235]) by smtp.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D77D839E80DB; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 01:22:42 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Thunderbird/3.1.7 In-Reply-To: <838vy7y8jz.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: bug-gnulib@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Gnulib discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnulib-bounces+gnu-bug-gnulib=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnulib-bounces+gnu-bug-gnulib=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lib.gnulib.bugs:25013 gmane.emacs.devel:135083 Archived-At: On 01/26/2011 07:43 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > . Is it true that time_r.c is needed only by mktime.c? Yes, for now, but once I add the strftime module, time_r.c will also be needed by strftime.c, and in that case MinGW will definitely need to worry about time_r.c. strftime is quite likely to be added. I've already coded it up and tested it, and it works fine on POSIXy platforms. I plan to add it to Emacs soon. Once it's in, Emacs's format-time-string function can start supporting higher-resolution time stamps. > . Is it true that stddef.in.h, unistd.in.h, and time.in.h are needed > only on systems which have "issues" with the corresponding > standard headers? The "issues" are either with the headers, or with the implementations of functions declared by the headers. > is it okay to compile gnulib sources in > lib/ without editing these 3 into the corresponding *.h files? If the MinGW headers and implementations are good enough, you should be OK without the .h files. I'd be surprised if that were true, though.