From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Sean Whitton Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Finalizing 'inhibit-automatic-native-compilation' Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 15:13:14 -0700 Message-ID: <87r0ux9nk5.fsf@athena.silentflame.com> References: <837cx8cey0.fsf@gnu.org> <83357vauh5.fsf@gnu.org> <837cx6a8me.fsf@gnu.org> <83357ua6ja.fsf@gnu.org> <83zga28ra8.fsf@gnu.org> <83r0vd97s0.fsf@gnu.org> <83lell73yv.fsf@gnu.org> <87sffo3as7.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <83v8kkxzzx.fsf@gnu.org> <87r0v811pm.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87cz6nxdqy.fsf@X570GP> <83357irhnv.fsf@gnu.org> <87ttzy2lgi.fsf@X570GP> <874jruft28.fsf@athena.silentflame.com> <83bkm2kknw.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="16455"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: aymeric.agon@yandex.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org, akrl@sdf.org, larsi@gnus.org, rlb@defaultvalue.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 10 23:14:15 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pQbeo-00048H-8V for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 23:14:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pQbe0-0006md-KG; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 17:13:24 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pQbdz-0006mH-8U for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 17:13:23 -0500 Original-Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.24]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pQbdx-0001HM-C5; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 17:13:23 -0500 Original-Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02C09320084E; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 17:13:16 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 10 Feb 2023 17:13:17 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=spwhitton.name; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:sender :subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1676067196; x=1676153596; bh=PT jI/lLy9T4XX0lR9bjf+jkLDtZtCWDsRMqLPQtN9Ss=; b=BxRo5XMpB8wvUPKAH/ qs1YTkcsJEx7J2U/rIeHyT6iBOFFusPTSfZeKVYwWXOWnG9HnfqNvpb0N4jJDit4 MVuwBdSi6B7cRQWM94MrE3j9ITMeRYU/9P7WglroUyWmGW1Zze3/p+o6S1uvmWz8 yVLb9cRXc0+/G17fYiRvyWmIiP4iPAxPGqDDa0r9K4HG1H6pCj2qBsSJQnC5qNH7 dwx8PApdPea/wqJYpO25Q1wYXzlhOUO8aHpDyO2U+aYtS2LSnQW+Uy5SYRm+mhnZ Y8PVj8MkhXN4VJPR2/+4Y+Uy1C1/KFPrmFgNmNBi9wsIICpOx9nQNNF8lya+vcV5 /hYw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; t=1676067196; x=1676153596; bh=PTjI/lLy9T4XX0lR9bjf+jkLDtZt CWDsRMqLPQtN9Ss=; b=idZojt7OGht4gqS9eSLkQCnUr698R+F/cIv/aTUWBb2Y 4Fk3et0I1dIScwEp4himxGR8COp33OrsYoZA51tozeiEUqITcUfFek2PT13vDzZ9 1h+aLvSa2mZToSZDgj+yN+X3ZlnsnoFH15tQvTHT4bnki4M+J0PeMH/paoUDvJMu x/NP/BTDchDUg5SU+pk1hn84qgQnpLTlseSZ5WLt1jnupER9lSlJJOXj0LdHbw7v 6+U6RTbMIbg7HjbjieU3CQa6EhLHv4XkzERtrHvxNzHTMqrAzO+HnxEjAmew6URg wCXSwdkBYfOHQ8YlVOI/a4IdqX7AOMSrgGr4Q1yKjw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrudehhedgudehjecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvfevufgjfhffkfgfgggtsehttddttddtredtnecuhfhrohhmpefuvggr nhcuhghhihhtthhonhcuoehsphifhhhithhtohhnsehsphifhhhithhtohhnrdhnrghmvg eqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnheptdffvdffueeluedvteekvdevhefghedvgeevgffhvedu keeggeelveegjeekteeknecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrg hilhhfrhhomhepshhpfihhihhtthhonhesshhpfihhihhtthhonhdrnhgrmhgv X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i23c04076:Fastmail Original-Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 17:13:16 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: by athena.silentflame.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id F11241B5B14; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 22:13:14 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: <83bkm2kknw.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 10 Feb 2023 10:08:03 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=64.147.123.24; envelope-from=spwhitton@spwhitton.name; helo=wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:303115 Archived-At: Hello, On Fri 10 Feb 2023 at 10:08AM +02, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > But here we are talking about test suites provided by 3rd-party > packages (not even Debian's code, AFAIU), and Makefile's they use. > How is the correctness and/or elegance of that design is of any > concern to us? Or for Debian, for that matter? I understand very > well that it is convenient for Debian to be able to run those test > suites without changing them too much, but I see no design issues > here, nothing except for the convenience. I definitely see no design > issues that should bother us, the upstream project. Well, let me try to put it in more general terms. Using Emacs as part of Debian's package build toolchain is, I think, as valid a use of Emacs as using it to write this e-mail message. And for that use case, what we need, in the most general terms, is some mechanism which (i) doesn't require patching lots of third party Makefiles to activate, and which (ii) avoids Emacs crashing in ways that it didn't crash before we turned on native compilation. Lars accepted these criteria and so he added the environment variable. (i) is about design, not a matter of convenience, because a tool that works as part of Debian's package build toolchain must not require piles of patching of third party Makefiles. Otherwise, it's a bug in that element of our toolchain. This is a point of view developed from our years of experience of working on Debian, and I'm sure developers of other distributions would agree. Distribution toolchains are fundamentally different to things like, say, GNU ELPA. We have a different relationship with the third party code than you do. Currently, the only thing that satisfies both (i) and (ii) is the environment variable. We would be very happy to use something else, and can help with testing it etc.. I understand that you don't want features in upstream Emacs for corner cases. I share this design goal with you. I think, though, that there are good reasons to think this is not a corner case, with Lars. The majority of users of Emacs on GNU systems are probably using our packages, and that requires a feature satisfying (i) and (ii). -- Sean Whitton