From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#17215: Acknowledgement (Build failure) Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 11:35:06 +0300 Message-ID: <837g6vt079.fsf@gnu.org> References: <871tx9k1dy.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87ioqfdfuw.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <53483E5E.8020705@dancol.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1397291785 2413 80.91.229.3 (12 Apr 2014 08:36:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 08:36:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 17215@debbugs.gnu.org, dak@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 12 10:36:18 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1WYtQ9-0001BS-Rm for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 10:36:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33342 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WYtQ9-0003fb-Es for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 04:36:17 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49625) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WYtQ0-0003HU-8K for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 04:36:13 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WYtPv-0007Ap-3R for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 04:36:08 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:37840) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WYtPv-0007Al-12 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 04:36:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WYtPu-0004AG-IG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 04:36:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2014 08:36:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 17215 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: moreinfo Original-Received: via spool by 17215-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B17215.139729171515934 (code B ref 17215); Sat, 12 Apr 2014 08:36:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 17215) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Apr 2014 08:35:15 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45997 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WYtP8-00048v-0o for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 04:35:14 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:46570) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WYtP4-00048Z-1Q for 17215@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 04:35:11 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0N3W00300SY3L900@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for 17215@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 11:35:03 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0N3W003OET6EHX30@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Sat, 12 Apr 2014 11:35:03 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:87968 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 16:11:58 -0400 > Cc: 17215@debbugs.gnu.org, David Kastrup > > >> It would appear that this particular bug yielded to the pure size > >> increase. What a singularly useless error behavior for a problem that > >> is expected to reoccur with some regularity! > > Still waiting to hear a response to my previous question on why we don't > > just abort as soon as we detect pure overflow. > > Good question. The reason is largely histerical, where it was > convenient to still have a partly usable Emacs. Nowadays, many more > people build their Emacs from trunk without having the technical > knowledge to detect and handle this problem, so it's probably better to > just abort. More people building development code doesn't mean more people who know what to do about pure storage. So just aborting without any helpful information (e.g., how much to enlarge the pure space, and what macro to change) doesn't seem like progress to me.