From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Pure space Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 15:49:54 +0300 Message-ID: <864j7j2u19.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87cym8jngk.fsf@protonmail.com> <87r0ank1hq.fsf@yahoo.com> <86frr32zs2.fsf@gnu.org> <8734n3jrrl.fsf@yahoo.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="335"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: pipcet@protonmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Po Lu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Aug 17 14:50:45 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1sfItJ-000AYV-Gq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 17 Aug 2024 14:50:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sfIsZ-0005C5-IO; Sat, 17 Aug 2024 08:49:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sfIsY-0005Bc-6j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 17 Aug 2024 08:49:58 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sfIsX-0007Sr-CH; Sat, 17 Aug 2024 08:49:57 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=xmeJmmXZDrGh3foYvvvf76aYUlSK95ODEj94kBz6TAI=; b=pWwh3S+OFnsq JbcLSGSWWCZc19+Tr5ur8i6Y9tOyRgE28t0nSIyVcqGoHzlc8GQQwqbZ4q+2nGFcJP+BJCBaaxNHH NUC1yn2dRFBbbx5rEn+kHzHzgqew7/vUxPNwJ65Z3aI98I1JMQva4NH73FaxjnGQ1fjyOY4w6mJzO RRyEMcs4gfAjTKw4nV8CbgrNqvceCrGIg4YpQqqpGQvFAUwoHPRpjq1jIna8rOOQFS3mkFvSIRfjs d7EOWHETCmofABTnj8UiBWCRNwoI5M2BpntQervJgwtiQpnqsgxECgw2vvwlapzyrXG/LlhhZP8wr OPjTL8BoDHLjM5c5zVllug==; In-Reply-To: <8734n3jrrl.fsf@yahoo.com> (message from Po Lu on Sat, 17 Aug 2024 19:46:54 +0800) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:322844 Archived-At: > From: Po Lu > Cc: pipcet@protonmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 19:46:54 +0800 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > Maybe it could, but I'm not interested in investing any development > > efforts in the unexec builds. So, as already discussed and decided > > long ago, if we want to remove the pure space, unexec will need to go > > with it. > > What difficulties attend removing pure space without also removing > unexec? They might make the unexec build less performant. But my main worry is that doing so will get us to where we never were before -- an unexec build without pure space, and I'm unwilling to invest any effort in that configuration. It is enough that I need to routinely build it on my machine to make sure it doesn't break; I don't want any more time wasted on that. Personally, I fail to understand why you want to keep unexec any longer than we did.