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 11:20:37 -0400 Message-ID: References: <36366a980807101702r5677d096g8e62ef5b3e278868@mail.gmail.com> <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> <4885EA77.5030208@gmail.com> <86ej5mgf05.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <4885F31E.8080408@gmail.com> <86abgagee2.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <4885F629.4040409@gmail.com> <861w1mgdek.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1216740162 31572 80.91.229.12 (22 Jul 2008 15:22:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:22:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: lennart.borgman@gmail.com, 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 17:23:28 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 1KLJhn-0000xT-Dj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:23:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56908 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJgu-0004LK-2v for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:22:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJg3-0003AG-Jr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:21:23 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJg1-00036M-6O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:21:22 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45606 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KLJg0-000361-Vo for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:21:21 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:53738) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KLJg0-0004uQ-Ot for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:21:20 -0400 Original-Received: from eliz by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1KLJfJ-0007Yl-LW; Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:20:37 -0400 In-reply-to: <861w1mgdek.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> (message from David Kastrup on Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:13:39 +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:101217 Archived-At: > X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, > UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=unavailable version=3.1.0 > From: David Kastrup > Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:13:39 +0200 > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , Johannes Weiner , > emacs-devel@gnu.org > > "Lennart Borgman (gmail)" writes: > > > David Kastrup wrote: > >>>>> Why don't you use perl for example instead? > >>>> Chicken and egg. Installation scripts have to rely on what is there. > >>> But you can build exectutable from perl scripts, or is not that > >>> possibility there any more? > > We needed a single executable for making installations and upgrades as > simple as possible for customers (they'll break everything otherwise). > A self-extracting batch file is doable reasonably well (once unzip.exe > has been installed). Appending an archive to a .exe file is not as > feasible, in contrast. > > >> It means pulling in a lot of external technology for just a simple > >> scripting job. Why should we do that if what is present in Windows > >> is so great? > > > > I guess you know perl, of course. I might misunderstand what you are > > actually doing. There is vbs too and different installation > > software. But let us drop this, I just wanted to give a suggestion. > > The main point is that we needed something we can support and that does > not deviate too much in functionality from our existing supported code. > Pulling in entirely different external technology just for installation > was not an option when "everything is there". > > > I agree this is a weak and disturbing point on w32, escpecially when > >you are used to have powerful scripting languages available. This is > >however not what w32 programmers use. > > Whatever. After wasting in the order of manyears on this endeavor, we > have reverted to GNU/Linux installs. People insisting on Windows get a > virtual machine. > > I don't think I know of any multi-platform free software project where > the Windows port is not responsible for the most hair-tearing and > frustration. > > -- > David Kastrup > > >