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 17:21:12 +0200 Message-ID: <86wsjeeyhj.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> References: <36366a980807101702r5677d096g8e62ef5b3e278868@mail.gmail.com> <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> <85y73u96jl.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <86r69mgig9.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <86iquygf71.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 1216740133 31471 80.91.229.12 (22 Jul 2008 15:22:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:22:13 +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 17:23:02 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 1KLJgu-0000X1-IV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:22:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56502 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJg1-0002zQ-1j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:21:21 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJfv-0002uk-1H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:21:15 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJfu-0002ss-3m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:21:14 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45602 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJft-0002sP-Uh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:21:13 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.quinscape.de ([212.29.44.217]:40340) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KLJft-0004sP-8q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:21:13 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail-ldap/ctrl 6315 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2008 15:21:11 -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 15:21:11 -0000 Original-Received: by lola.quinscape.zz (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 684B78EEEF; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:21:12 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:12:00 -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:101216 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: David Kastrup >> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:34:58 +0200 >> Cc: hannes@saeurebad.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org >> >> Eli Zaretskii writes: >> >> >> From: David Kastrup >> >> Cc: hannes@saeurebad.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org >> >> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:24:38 +0200 >> >> >> >> Yes, since COMMAND.COM and CMD.EXE behave quite differently, and also >> >> differently on different versions of Windows. >> > >> > And zsh behaves differently from Bash which behaves differently from >> > the Borne shell. >> >> Not in the basic Bourne shell features. > > And COMMAND.COM behaves like CMD.EXE ``in the basic DOS shell > features''. The % quoting is different. Particularly when you get into loops. Command line parameters are different. There are other things. > This can go on forever, you know. Your bias and lack of objective > comparison are obvious. No need to continue. Sure, I get to different results than you after having worked with everything. Naturally that makes me biased. >> >> So tell me: How to you quote the word (written as Lisp string) >> >> "\"goof\" " to the typical Windows shell? >> > >> > See the Emacs makefiles for Windows. >> >> They don't quote such words. > > Yes, they do, see for example `check-declare' in lisp/makefile.w32-in. So why don't you just tell me? You are the expert on Windows, having tested it thoroughly and found it easy to use. Just tell me how to pass the string "\"goof\" " from the command line to a Windows batch file so that it assigns it to a single positional parameter, including the quotes and the trailing spaces? >> I have worked with DOS beginning with version 1.0 when they were >> still mainly working with FCBs rather than file descriptors, and I >> have worked with CP/M, and I have worked with UNIX on various >> processors and OS/2. I have done quite a bit of assembly and system >> programming in all of those systems (many of that for pay), so I know >> a lot of the inheritage, memory and system layouts, and I know a lot >> of the implementations, and what system calls were done with what >> sort of data structures when what sort of features were implemented >> imitating features from elsewhere. > > Sorry, I'm not interested in a pissing contest. Don't question my qualifications if you don't want to hear them. -- David Kastrup