From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Gerd_M=C3=B6llmann?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Building the igc branch on MS-Windows Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 17:27:12 +0200 Message-ID: References: <86il063imh.fsf@gnu.org> <87ttjqghyd.fsf@gmail.com> <86zfti101u.fsf@gnu.org> <87pluegd4z.fsf@gmail.com> <86ttjp20je.fsf@gnu.org> <87y191fwnd.fsf@gmail.com> <87cyqcfv6k.fsf@gmail.com> <86o79wzi31.fsf@gnu.org> <86mspgza23.fsf@gnu.org> <86a5lgz7qa.fsf@gnu.org> <86wmokxiod.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="23225"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: eller.helmut@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 26 17:28:06 2024 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 1s0NUc-0005s4-FK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 17:28:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1s0NTt-000741-1v; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 11:27:21 -0400 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 1s0NTq-00071F-59 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 11:27:18 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ed1-x530.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::530]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1s0NTo-0000sh-Bb; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 11:27:17 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ed1-x530.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-572669fd9f9so180940a12.0; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 08:27:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1714145234; x=1714750034; darn=gnu.org; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ANRXb57PfR6/pDRO24AJIDm2f25F1/M/FH/nBkTBz9Y=; b=HS6e1bgkEWHPpuIX/Oz/RGZcgQX18Oy77I4UbaPoSfJlVN8BK13mXOd46jbQgKc9LO uQk2tjWG580D6oaCz43DVJt2coVTMn94BLXag8AyLxPktuHI9YiS+4dxS0mi721zPAWw reEIIN99XwAfJNbH/a1Ph44cHc8BeOFXyRMIBY8NoySNErvmNM/Az3sxm7mO5mjXwcLj OupV2PCDvKQzgRFpNHo+Dx8bNWoY+oij+mGZHR9hvDKQ9VDVgX7XXNsrnsi2EUlD3cVM 49yYxtkwwWLeV1mijyWEcMR5OnClFD2lkvVDtPOmXOe5f6DExJwuXcNupHIDNnzOJ5HK n0Hw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1714145234; x=1714750034; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=ANRXb57PfR6/pDRO24AJIDm2f25F1/M/FH/nBkTBz9Y=; b=ofTZx30uukzHYu84iiPrN85fdFrQpk1ESNg6vScbPoh+/2eXmhikDT3MkcxiSNd8he 31H+Bct+F88SHLtQuVII/f+cKtzUnckOjkeUuNqorXAH92l6vxOlI64HGMJU6HB+BO4X wsyO6JRIyVephuhu7bHFZ5Z716RRBdBe5CgjhlqJjCbDuydydH6OUwJCCT+/WojUMj0W 6mA64jksQtMIcoxYceUbWj1k0w5wznEUuBUcoFp9UP/SbmRL5YQkMwlqiIQADeKthVwg 29dsKof4xUlvCvhVjpS2BZlgmYdwz3VASFQ6EgU8sqjHqvuYo7nMNnkc37MHQ8u+sojK j+2g== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVa0CM0xJZkl07RN/rOfI8wrucawmw0nr4S2p+qOHRshN2BHhPay1kx76ybTnH5tqcmbaRu39gZinbst9rDEg8t7egc X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yyt8itHCmHn595TItDWtqsV5TRuUNwEUH+5RD9srnhMIsSCd8HH zt/XZXMuDFWvsw8Znk90JPIGFcNJBzree8k2q2MOs3o+/FwY9d1c0XZf6A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEQpJob7oQDEnMvWW3GC1zsaXJrtJU8INnR0+TjyqhONnuSQEQLBpCVpA58duq5pwL7fYPYVw== X-Received: by 2002:a50:9b41:0:b0:56e:6aa:c7c4 with SMTP id a1-20020a509b41000000b0056e06aac7c4mr1744220edj.42.1714145234142; Fri, 26 Apr 2024 08:27:14 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from pro2.fritz.box (p4fe3a4eb.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [79.227.164.235]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id da25-20020a056402177900b005700024ca57sm10247057edb.4.2024.04.26.08.27.13 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 26 Apr 2024 08:27:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <86wmokxiod.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 26 Apr 2024 18:11:46 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::530; envelope-from=gerd.moellmann@gmail.com; helo=mail-ed1-x530.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=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:318143 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Because PVEC_OTHER is handled fine now, except whatever w32 does in >> addition or maybe instead > > Then maybe the assertion should be w32-only (if only w32 uses > PVEC_OTHER; I thought Helmut said he saw the same problem on > GNU/Linux?). But removing it completely is not TRT, IMO. We already > have quite a lot of code which was disabled under HAVE_MPS, and at > least some of that looks like workarounds for problems that got "low > priority". I'm not sure this is a good way of making progress here, > especially since some of those #ifdef's could potentially cause > problems elsewhere. We've made progress since then. The code now uses a new PVEC type for module references, and so we should be fine in all cases since the old GC code doesn't do anything special for PVEC_OTHER. Only remaining check that could to be done is if the scroll bar struct on w32 contains a pointer to something that must be traced, but I find that highly unlikely. > I think we should methodically try to solve every problem we bump > into, without any priorities. Priorities are fine when we want to > make a POC, to see if this is workable. I think we are way past that > point, so leaving unsolved problems is no longer a useful methodology. Yeah, except for the native compilation, which I currently prioritize for mysefl. I haven't made progress there, alas. But otherwise, I must say I'm kind of impressed by us :-). >> (has it modules?) > > Of course. In a Windows build I have: > > load-suffixes > => (".dll" ".elc" ".el") Ah, ok. Thanks! DLLs, of course...