From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: GnuTLS for W32 Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 20:21:49 +0100 Message-ID: <8739bvs27m.fsf@wanadoo.es> References: <87ipktag2e.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87fwfxtxuz.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87aa64ubg9.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83boqkr9bp.fsf@gnu.org> <874nwcu17i.fsf@wanadoo.es> <834nwcr6un.fsf@gnu.org> <87vcosskhc.fsf@wanadoo.es> <831urgr2yr.fsf@gnu.org> <87r4zgsh2w.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87ipks3zbo.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87boqk3q69.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87aa634st8.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87fwfvsgfv.fsf@wanadoo.es> <877h17scdo.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87hb0b77nr.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1325704938 32116 80.91.229.12 (4 Jan 2012 19:22:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 19:22:18 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 04 20:22:11 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RiWPa-0006F0-Q2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 20:22:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33101 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RiWPa-0004sX-7D for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 14:22:10 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:36747) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RiWPW-0004sP-GX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 14:22:07 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RiWPS-0002FZ-Ad for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 14:22:06 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:48812) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RiWPS-0002FQ-1s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 14:22:02 -0500 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RiWPR-0006AC-8n for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 20:22:01 +0100 Original-Received: from 225.red-79-147-11.dynamicip.rima-tde.net ([79.147.11.225]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 20:22:01 +0100 Original-Received: from ofv by 225.red-79-147-11.dynamicip.rima-tde.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 20:22:01 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 40 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 225.red-79-147-11.dynamicip.rima-tde.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.91 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:NIUvp6g0yiDSdIMd3Hml5Vsms/k= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 80.91.229.12 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:147285 Archived-At: Ted Zlatanov writes: > ÓF> Sharing the gnutls dll is so wrong at some many levels that I wont > ÓF> start discussing it. > > I am puzzled by this. Why is it wrong to share the GnuTLS DLL? This is a common scenario on MS Windows: multiple providers of binary packages, multiple installers with different install policies even for the same installer, lots of directories on PATH (each application lives on its own directory and often wants to be listed on PATH), varying policies about where a non-privileged user is allowed to put binaries, multiple incompatible binary macropackages that provides the same executables and libraries with the same names (Cygwin, MSYS, GnuWin32 and what-not), a lack of culture of system administration, a growing tendency to rely on self-updating packages... and the list goes on. If a user is informed about the need to fix GnuTLS (through the local newspaper, I guess) his first reaction would be "GnuWhat? Is it on my machine?" Next, as every desktop computer user would do, he performs a full HD file search for the library ("and BTW, how is it named, exactly?") After locating the instance (or multiple instances) he needs to figure out the correct procedure to update it ("Was this installed along something else? Has this be put here by an installer of some sort? Does that installer offer an update method? What depends on this dll? What's the installed version, and what's the compatible update? Is it available somewhere? If I use this newer version which I found with a Google search, can something break apart?") Sure, for us it all looks very easy, but I suffered DLL hell a few times and it is very frustrating. Can't imagine how can it be for a novice or a less computer-savvy user. For a Windows binary package to be robust, it must be as self-contained as possible. Quality-wise, one of the best decisions I ever made was to distribute the C/C++ MS runtime dlls along with the rest of my binaries, no matter they are already installed on virtually all MS Windows machines. Certain long-standing, very nasty bugs simply went away. [snip]