From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: dhruva Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: CVS HEAD fails to build on OSX 10.4 (macterm.c broken?) Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2007 20:25:04 +0530 Message-ID: References: <86k5re4blv.fsf@blue.stonehenge.com> <86fy224aah.fsf@blue.stonehenge.com> <86bqcq4a4q.fsf@blue.stonehenge.com> <200708291604.l7TG4atk011108@oogie-boogie.ics.uci.edu> <867ine492x.fsf@blue.stonehenge.com> <863ay24826.fsf@blue.stonehenge.com> <200708291641.l7TGfo2t012413@oogie-boogie.ics.uci.edu> <200708310812.l7V8Cgq9022040@oogie-boogie.ics.uci.edu> <86lkbnygii.fsf@blue.stonehenge.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1188831386 17740 80.91.229.12 (3 Sep 2007 14:56:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2007 14:56:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Randal L. Schwartz" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 03 16:56:25 2007 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 1ISDLe-0005xE-0U for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 16:56:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISDLc-0002g3-PS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 10:56:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ISDKX-00024x-D1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 10:55:09 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ISDKV-00022w-Kk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 10:55:08 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ISDKV-00022p-Fe for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 10:55:07 -0400 Original-Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.174]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1ISDKU-0007L3-W3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 10:55:07 -0400 Original-Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id m4so389535uge for ; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 07:55:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=BybSSHoz0Sdy8w1KwVPGxqmW9+wCVod3bG6YmshGs7s2xTBSTTrDxIAMjOjmWsjOqWT5LCMtdPbkM5WpN2wqLnigmO9GU6iY2RlBuKKSz+nCUFiXBIYYowLoPNMMuoPkdNFqYrPGTtatNioX/LRS4BnXc1+qPzDs18I2pcbOEFM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ry0KRYIS8hkvv6X2g94psy9i8LVqWj0lYEtdL8PskUrCF05opy7p0xJqnlmQCpCZjg6kow1So5BF660jFlLLtFgBd8qIvc3+WoX6EI5NVDCZMvrVpnwFwN/RBZseXio/bAo+luco+7e2Xq960uswcSa+JfG1PvdDQ2Gz2VSl9cI= Original-Received: by 10.78.172.20 with SMTP id u20mr3325081hue.1188831304408; Mon, 03 Sep 2007 07:55:04 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.78.90.19 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Sep 2007 07:55:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <86lkbnygii.fsf@blue.stonehenge.com> Content-Disposition: inline X-Detected-Kernel: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) 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:77655 Archived-At: Hi, On 9/3/07, Randal L. Schwartz wrote: > more smoke testing for OSX. Please let me know if that changes, or tell me if > there's a way to back out the multi-tty branch, or something. With many issues cropping up due to multi-tty code, would it be possible to have a seperate branch with pre-multi-tty into which UNICODE could be merged in. UNICODE branch is much closer to the HEAD than multi-tty was before merge. UNICODE is almost a platform independent feature where as the current multi-tty is more GNU/Linux (and other UNIX) specific. At first go, would it be better to have UNICODE in the HEAD and get the multi-tty branch up to the HEAD level (with UNICODE) and finally bring it in to the main stream. We have active maintainer and development on the UNICODE branch and issues will get resolved much faster. The above proposition is based on a very top level view I have on this topic not knowing the real efforts involved. I am no way trying to undermine the efforts of the fellow developers that has gone in to the creation of multi-tty and merging of it to the HEAD. -dky -- Dhruva Krishnamurthy Contents reflect my personal views only!