From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs vista build failures Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:42:20 -0400 Message-ID: References: <36366a980807101702r5677d096g8e62ef5b3e278868@mail.gmail.com> <87k5fph5rh.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <20080713214648.GB1076@muc.de> <20080714195651.GF3445@muc.de> <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> <87wsje37rg.fsf@saeurebad.de> <86mykaggmk.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1216737838 22455 80.91.229.12 (22 Jul 2008 14:43:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:43:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: hannes@saeurebad.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 22 16:44:45 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 1KLJ6T-0001DI-Iq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:44:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52730 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJ5a-00014L-BA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:43:42 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJ50-0000pl-Jf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:43:06 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJ4y-0000p1-9b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:43:06 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=40929 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJ4y-0000ov-4G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:43:04 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:38611) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KLJ4x-0005bG-QP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:43:03 -0400 Original-Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1KLJ4G-0006gN-GM; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:42:20 -0400 In-reply-to: <86mykaggmk.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> (message from David Kastrup on Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:04:03 +0200) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:101207 Archived-At: > From: David Kastrup > Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 16:04:03 +0200 > Cc: Johannes Weiner , emacs-devel@gnu.org > > REM Get current directory > set targetdir=%CD% > > REM %targetdir% has to be postprocessed since if it is a root directory, > REM it will end in a backslash which escapes a double quote when calling > REM Java. So we append a single dot in that case. > for %%l in (%targetdir%) do if "%%~pnl" == "\" (set targetdir=%targetdir%.) > > call ant.bat -Dinstaller.path="%targetdir%" > > > Can you imagine how many mandays get wasted on utterly appalling > workarounds like that? And of course, this just works on one version of > cmd.exe, and might break on another. > > Bourne shell programming is _much_ more consistent, regular, and simple. Again, you are approaching a non-Posix platforms with Posix-centric perspective. Shell programming is a Posix idea. If you want a program, write it in a programming language, not in shell. > This list certainly is not the place to discuss the presence or absence > of merits in Windows. But if we get a bit more Emacs-specific and you > take a look at conditional code being used when under all sort of UNIX > systems and code being used when under w32, then take a good look at > what code is more complex and awkward. I already explained why: the original code was designed with Posix functionality in mind, that's why it doesn't port easily to anything else.