From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: /srv/bzr/emacs/trunk r110582: Fix wording of error message in staticpro. Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 22:50:56 +0200 Message-ID: <83ipa71p3j.fsf@gnu.org> References: <5080564C.5090309@dancol.org> <3slif3qzvf.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1350593493 13806 80.91.229.3 (18 Oct 2012 20:51:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 20:51:33 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 18 22:51:41 2012 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 1TOx47-0007zn-Ew for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 22:51:39 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45892 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TOx40-0004QQ-6H for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:51:32 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:59110) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TOx3x-0004KH-5u for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:51:30 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TOx3w-000850-DT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:51:29 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:48652) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TOx3w-00084q-59; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:51:28 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MC300700WCW5S00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 22:50:58 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MC3006XAWKXV750@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 22:50:58 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <3slif3qzvf.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.166 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:154426 Archived-At: > From: Glenn Morris > Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:39:00 -0400 > > Daniel Colascione wrote: > > > Actually, I don't like either version of that message. I think "increasing" > > binds more easily to "Emacs" than to "NSTATICS", leading to confusion. What > > about "NSTATICS too small; increase it and recompile EMACS."? > > IMO, the second clause should be absent altogether, or say "please make > a bug report". As with puresize, this is not something users should be > changing. As long as we are bykeshedding, how about NSTATICS should be enlarged. ?