From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ted Zlatanov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: GnuTLS for W32 Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 11:29:44 -0500 Organization: =?utf-8?B?0KLQtdC+0LTQvtGAINCX0LvQsNGC0LDQvdC+0LI=?= @ Cienfuegos Message-ID: <87hb0b77nr.fsf@lifelogs.com> References: <83obumqa0v.fsf@gnu.org> <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> Reply-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1325694615 17337 80.91.229.12 (4 Jan 2012 16:30:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:30:15 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 04 17:30:10 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 1RiTj7-0006gr-ES for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:30:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51793 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RiTj6-0003bD-V3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 11:30:08 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:56671) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RiTiz-0003Xs-JI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 11:30:07 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RiTiy-0007Kq-BE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 11:30:01 -0500 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:44537) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RiTiy-0007Ke-1C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 11:30:00 -0500 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RiTiw-0006c3-Fw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:29:58 +0100 Original-Received: from c-76-28-40-19.hsd1.vt.comcast.net ([76.28.40.19]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:29:58 +0100 Original-Received: from tzz by c-76-28-40-19.hsd1.vt.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:29:58 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Lines: 22 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-76-28-40-19.hsd1.vt.comcast.net X-Face: bd.DQ~'29fIs`T_%O%C\g%6jW)yi[zuz6; d4V0`@y-~$#3P_Ng{@m+e4o<4P'#(_GJQ%TT= D}[Ep*b!\e,fBZ'j_+#"Ps?s2!4H2-Y"sx" Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:a7ukteBA2A6BIjnce87YejgUJ0w= 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:147276 Archived-At: On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 16:42:11 +0100 Óscar Fuentes wrote: ÓF> As far as I'm concerned, there are two sane options here: suppose that ÓF> the user is a geek, advertise GnuTLS support citing the dll requirement ÓF> finishing with "now that's your problem". The other approach is to do ÓF> the job from Emacs, do it well, and automatically download and upgrade ÓF> the dll from Elpa. If those are the only two options, obviously the second one is better. On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:22:18 +0100 Óscar Fuentes wrote: 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? If you and Eli and other W32 experts say a standalone self-updating installer that drops a shared GnuTLS DLL in a common area is a bad idea, I won't argue. But you have to at least explain your reasoning. Ted