From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs vista build failures Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:57:57 +0200 Message-ID: <8663qyge4q.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> References: <36366a980807101702r5677d096g8e62ef5b3e278868@mail.gmail.com> <20080714195651.GF3445@muc.de> <487C5FA3.4070603@emf.net> <87zloggji9.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <878wvxxkn6.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87ej5oz4pb.fsf@saeurebad.de> <87vdyzxype.fsf@saeurebad.de> <871w1njq32.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87iquzxgtk.fsf@saeurebad.de> <4884CFEF.8040404@gmail.com> <87ej5nxew2.fsf@saeurebad.de> <87wsje37rg.fsf@saeurebad.de> <86mykaggmk.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1216738714 25779 80.91.229.12 (22 Jul 2008 14:58:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:58:34 +0000 (UTC) Cc: hannes@saeurebad.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 22 16:59:23 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KLJKP-0007PR-5O for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:59:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60021 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJJV-0000bJ-OC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:58:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJJQ-0000ap-On for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:58:00 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJJQ-0000ac-D7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:58:00 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=48047 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJJQ-0000aZ-8G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:58:00 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.quinscape.de ([212.29.44.217]:55500) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KLJJP-0008TN-Br for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:57:59 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail-ldap/ctrl 4321 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2008 14:57:57 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO lola.quinscape.zz) ([10.0.3.43]) (envelope-sender ) by quinx.quinscape.de (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 22 Jul 2008 14:57:57 -0000 Original-Received: by lola.quinscape.zz (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 433E18EEEF; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:57:57 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:42:20 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-AntiVirus: checked by AntiVir MailGate (version: 2.1.3-2; AVE: 7.8.1.11; VDF: 7.0.5.151; host: quinx) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:101210 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: David Kastrup >> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:04:03 +0200 >> Cc: Johannes Weiner , emacs-devel@gnu.org >> >> REM Get current directory >> set targetdir=%CD% >> >> REM %targetdir% has to be postprocessed since if it is a root directory, >> REM it will end in a backslash which escapes a double quote when calling >> REM Java. So we append a single dot in that case. >> for %%l in (%targetdir%) do if "%%~pnl" == "\" (set targetdir=%targetdir%.) >> >> call ant.bat -Dinstaller.path="%targetdir%" >> >> >> Can you imagine how many mandays get wasted on utterly appalling >> workarounds like that? And of course, this just works on one version of >> cmd.exe, and might break on another. >> >> Bourne shell programming is _much_ more consistent, regular, and simple. > > Again, you are approaching a non-Posix platforms with Posix-centric > perspective. Shell programming is a Posix idea. If you want a > program, write it in a programming language, not in shell. So what programming languages does Windows come with? Or are we not actually talking about Windows after all? "Windows is great, because you can get something else to work around its shortcomings."? >> This list certainly is not the place to discuss the presence or >> absence of merits in Windows. But if we get a bit more >> Emacs-specific and you take a look at conditional code being used >> when under all sort of UNIX systems and code being used when under >> w32, then take a good look at what code is more complex and awkward. > > I already explained why: the original code was designed with Posix > functionality in mind, that's why it doesn't port easily to anything > else. Whatever. It is clear that you will not be fazed from your claims. So it is rather pointless to continue this charade. -- David Kastrup