From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Paul Eggert Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Omitting Windows-specific parts from infrastructure changes Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:14:28 -0800 Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: <54BD81C4.1070109@cs.ucla.edu> References: <838uh32gpg.fsf@gnu.org> <54B9D960.1000001@cs.ucla.edu> <834mrp24b1.fsf@gnu.org> <54BBF6E7.3090802@cs.ucla.edu> <83a91gymld.fsf@gnu.org> <54BC08B2.8070302@cs.ucla.edu> <837fwjzx5f.fsf@gnu.org> <54BC18B9.50202@cs.ucla.edu> <83y4oyycz8.fsf@gnu.org> <54BD4657.3010202@cs.ucla.edu> <83egqqy637.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1421705687 22036 80.91.229.3 (19 Jan 2015 22:14:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 22:14:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 19 23:14:45 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YDKar-0005df-CN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 23:14:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40015 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YDKaq-0001FQ-J6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 17:14:44 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54222) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YDKam-0001Ea-Av for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 17:14:41 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YDKal-0005t4-Ey for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 17:14:40 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.62]:47716) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YDKac-0005q4-QT; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 17:14:30 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA75539E8020; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:14:29 -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 HV36idIyJrR4; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:14:29 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.9] (pool-173-55-11-52.lsanca.fios.verizon.net [173.55.11.52]) by smtp.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 49DBF39E801B; Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:14:29 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 In-Reply-To: <83egqqy637.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 131.179.128.62 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:181449 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii wrote: > It is working because I cleaned it up. It didn't work before that No, the code already worked for the patches we're talking about, e.g., replacing strcat with stpcpy. And it still works, in the places where the MS-Windows code still uses strcat instead of stpcpy. > The costs are minuscule: just a short notice posted here. The costs would be more than that, as I'd need to examine code that I don't look at now, and I'd have to save notes about the examination somewhere, and keep track of these notes during the time period between searching and installing the fix, which is often weeks. I have dozens of variants of the GNU Emacs development sources and can't be expected to remember how each was derived, so all this work product would have to be maintained somehow. This would add nontrivial bureaucracy to the maintenance of mainline code, with only a trivial benefit to non-mainline maintenance. It's not worth it.