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: Why and not "config.h" ? Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 08:46:08 +0200 Message-ID: <87iq40rtn3.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <87wrsgs5t3.fsf@telefonica.net> <87y6cwz6bq.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87sk34s2ws.fsf@telefonica.net> <4C4FCE87.4090600@swipnet.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1280299607 3542 80.91.229.12 (28 Jul 2010 06:46:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2010 06:46:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar?= Fuentes , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Jan =?utf-8?Q?Dj=C3=A4rv?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 28 08:46:44 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oe0Pb-0003aB-Vh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 08:46:44 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44418 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Oe0Pb-0000KP-9k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:46:43 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=41220 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Oe0PV-0000JA-07 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:46:37 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oe0PT-0001yk-A7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:46:36 -0400 Original-Received: from impaqm4.telefonica.net ([213.4.138.4]:64694) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oe0PS-0001yK-RZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:46:35 -0400 Original-Received: from IMPmailhost2.adm.correo ([10.20.102.39]) by IMPaqm4.telefonica.net with bizsmtp id nHue1e00f0r0BT63QJmAjU; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 08:46:10 +0200 Original-Received: from qcore ([83.42.13.171]) by IMPmailhost2.adm.correo with BIZ IMP id nJm81e0093hRxRf1iJm9XT; Wed, 28 Jul 2010 08:46:10 +0200 X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-TE-authinfo: authemail="981711563$telefonica.net" |auth_email="981711563@telefonica.net" X-TE-AcuTerraCos: auth_cuTerraCos="cosuitnetc01" In-Reply-To: <4C4FCE87.4090600@swipnet.se> ("Jan =?utf-8?Q?Dj=C3=A4rv=22's?= message of "Wed, 28 Jul 2010 08:30:31 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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:127913 Archived-At: Jan Dj=C3=A4rv writes: >>> Seems very silly to me ("don't do that!") but ... >> >> At this point I wonder how dangerous is to make that (an out of source >> build after an in-source build) since the out of source build puts lots >> of products on the source tree directory (.el, .elc, DOC...) Maybe those >> are identical on most cases, but think on the possibility of a bug on >> the Elisp machinary of the emacs executable created by one of the >> builds, being masked by the .el[c] files created by the other. > > That doesn't happen. elc-files are portable, and DOC should be also. > elc-files are in-tree even with an out-tree build, that is one of the > nice things, not having to do make bootstrap all the time. As explained above, if the .elc files are corrupted by a buggy Emacs or a buggy Emacs ends using healthy .elc files, by sharing the produced .elc/.el files among several builds you are hiding a bug. Mixing the products of different builds is never a good idea. [snip] >> So I agree that "don't do that" should be the right answer. >> > > Considering that <> enables a real use-case and "" does not, and the > fact that using "" gives exactly no benefits what so ever, please > stick to <>. It is not even less to type. I can't imagine any reason > for switching now. Maybe is my hideous English, but as explained on my original message <> is giving me problems with some tool.