From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Juanma Barranquero" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Bootstrapping Emacs-23.0.60-trunk newly broken (GNU/Linux, Cygwin) Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 11:27:34 +0200 Message-ID: References: <47FF2A29.4010908@alice.it> <4800687C.8090708@alice.it> <48007E59.7040805@alice.it> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1207992479 16186 80.91.229.12 (12 Apr 2008 09:27:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 09:27:59 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Angelo Graziosi" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 12 11:28:33 2008 connect(): Connection refused 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 1Jkc24-0004SG-Ks for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 11:28:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jkc1Q-0007sh-Mf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 05:27:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jkc1K-0007sb-6S for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 05:27:38 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jkc1I-0007sK-B2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 05:27:37 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jkc1I-0007sD-13 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 05:27:36 -0400 Original-Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com ([209.85.146.181]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jkc1H-0005XU-Vq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 05:27:36 -0400 Original-Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k34so802626wah.10 for ; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 02:27:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; 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; bh=//uHcLfCpH/uQ0VHDNLYcx/rGqypi1MYgd2TZvgYGOQ=; b=GNtvM9yHGUzCl5fED7W3Upf1dHok0cFd9H+CdWkuhrRmFfWi4yFgtZZIz+8hmALd/m0+etkNP+iQ1e6hk5tJO44BKLth6tmYGGwmwAdKq5q6or/rkS7ZVrUTPzhqqyydm9520MxOA2gGmvZ/ptwVwRaoa1wPEl3mkVcFB6BNPHw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Y8f4Qlf/ktr4fGlWb+tgyFPJn4+SXCjCMe6ep6xZHCyJM1kvSo/wVUpHAAUwOxw6KIwWcNl0QyLY2y1mIQSivWjj1pFVaCxHWEnqiEW/n5OchiZYGO6GU3QMEjxcklMGJMlx5z9dVmMXQ6Q9E1KKwG6KUzEcBxAHO1+fwD3j/ro= Original-Received: by 10.114.66.2 with SMTP id o2mr4620222waa.102.1207992454774; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 02:27:34 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.115.72.13 with HTTP; Sat, 12 Apr 2008 02:27:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <48007E59.7040805@alice.it> Content-Disposition: inline X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: 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:95028 Archived-At: On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Angelo Graziosi wrote: > But how could the trunk users to test a new patch if it breaks the > bootstrap? There is no need to bootstrap after every cvs update... > I thought that passing the bootstrap was the minimal request for submitting > a patch and that this would be reached if all start with the same conditions > in bootstrapping. In an ideal world, it'd be nice if each change were to be known not to break bootstrapping. But the fact is, most patches do not break it [1], and the ones that do are usually detected quite fast, so it is a waste of resources to require everyone to bootstrap before each commit [2]. [1] Some changes (configure, makefiles, autoloads, etc.) are more likely than others; we're hit such a spot right now :( [2] Bear in mind that tiny, apparently trivial changes can break it: there's no complexity threshold below which a change is totally safe. Juanma