From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dave Love Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: TODO additions Date: 31 Oct 2002 18:42:59 +0000 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1036125714 20419 80.91.224.249 (1 Nov 2002 04:41:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 04:41:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 187Td2-0005JD-00 for ; Fri, 01 Nov 2002 05:41:52 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 187Tiw-0004wy-00 for ; Fri, 01 Nov 2002 05:47:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 187Td3-0007s7-00; Thu, 31 Oct 2002 23:41:53 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 187KIZ-0001jR-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:44:07 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 187KI1-0001ce-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:44:05 -0500 Original-Received: from albion.dl.ac.uk ([148.79.80.39]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 187KHU-0001Vs-00; Thu, 31 Oct 2002 13:43:00 -0500 Original-Received: from fx by albion.dl.ac.uk with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 187KHT-0005mE-00; Thu, 31 Oct 2002 18:42:59 +0000 Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 39 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:9021 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:9021 Richard Stallman writes: > When Autoconf handles a specific issue, it is a good idea to switch > over to using Autoconf to handle it. But I'd be extremely surprised > if Autoconf handled all the issues that Emacs needs to know about. It may not have canned tests for everything, but I don't think writing tests where necessary and providing explicit info which can't be tested is so difficult. I don't see how Emacs is special, especially compared with gcc and gdb, say (having been through this with gcc). If a test is useful for Emacs, it's likely to be useful elsewhere. > To implement an Autoconf test for any given issue might be easy or it > might be hard. Yes, but I have a fair idea what's involved, since I did a lot of it once. > Even when it seems easy enough to write the Autoconf > test, verifying that it really tests the right thing is substantial > effort. The point is that you don't have to test everywhere. I know that doesn't provide real guarantees, but it's better than the current situation, where the configuration keeps falling over on mainstream platforms (even on GNU at least once). There doesn't seem to be much testing of the sort of systems I have to deal with anyhow. I've recently addressed issues on current versions of Solaris, Irix and Tru64 which wouldn't have occurred with canonical autoconf. The Solaris issue with bcopy & al was actually the same as what I'd already addressed specifically for Irix; using autoconf tests in that case avoids more systems breaking that way in future. > This is not worth the trouble, when the code is stable > and not giving us trouble. But the code isn't stable -- a change since the emacs-unicode branch broke the Tru64 build -- and it's certainly still giving me trouble. That's why I raised the topic again.