Pretest 22.1.90

Pretest 22.1.90

[Chong Yidong]

The first pretest for the Emacs 22.2 release is now available.
It can be downloaded from

  ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-22.1.90.tar.gz

The xdelta against the Emacs 22.1 release is available at

  ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-22.1-22.1.90.xdelta

The CVS tag for this pretest is EMACS_PRETEST_22_1_90.  Send email to
emacs-devel@gnu.org if there are any problems with the pretest.

Thanks.

Re: Pretest 22.1.90

[Jason Rumney]

Chong Yidong wrote:
> The CVS tag for this pretest is EMACS_PRETEST_22_1_90.  Send email to
> emacs-devel@gnu.org if there are any problems with the pretest.
>   

The file nt/emacs.manifest is missing from the tar file (it is tagged in 
CVS).

Re: Pretest 22.1.90

[Jason Rumney]

Jason Rumney wrote:
> Chong Yidong wrote:
>> The CVS tag for this pretest is EMACS_PRETEST_22_1_90.  Send email to
>> emacs-devel@gnu.org if there are any problems with the pretest.
>>   
>
> The file nt/emacs.manifest is missing from the tar file (it is tagged 
> in CVS).

I've updated make-dist to include this file in future releases.

Re: Pretest 22.1.90

[Jason Rumney]

Chong Yidong wrote:
> The first pretest for the Emacs 22.2 release is now available.
> It can be downloaded from
>
>   ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-22.1.90.tar.gz
>   
Should the 22.1 pretests be removed from alpha.gnu.org now? It would 
make things clearer to users who browse alpha.gnu.org rather than 
clicking on the links in email.

Re: Pretest 22.1.90

[Chong Yidong]

Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org> writes:

>>> The CVS tag for this pretest is EMACS_PRETEST_22_1_90.  Send email to
>>> emacs-devel@gnu.org if there are any problems with the pretest.
>>>   
>>
>> The file nt/emacs.manifest is missing from the tar file (it is
>> tagged in CVS).
>
> I've updated make-dist to include this file in future releases.

Thanks.

Re: Pretest 22.1.90

[Jason Rumney]

Chong Yidong wrote:
> The first pretest for the Emacs 22.2 release is now available.
> It can be downloaded from
>
>   ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/emacs-22.1.90.tar.gz
>   

A Windows binary is available at
  ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/windows/emacs-22.1.90-bin-i386.zip

It contains the manifest file that was missing from the src 
distribution, and is required for building on Windows.

In addition, libxpm.dll is bundled, the source for which can be 
downloaded from
  ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/windows/libXpm-3.5.7-w32-src.zip

Re: Pretest 22.1.90

[Richard Stallman]

    Should the 22.1 pretests be removed from alpha.gnu.org now? 

Yes, we should have done that when 22.1 was released.

Image DLLs for the Windows binary of Emacs 22.2 (was: Pretest 22.1.90)

[Reiner Steib]

On Thu, Jan 31 2008, Jason Rumney wrote:

> A Windows binary is available at
>  ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/windows/emacs-22.1.90-bin-i386.zip
[...]
> In addition, libxpm.dll is bundled, [...]

What about the DLLs for PNG, JPEG and other image formats?  It would
be great if you could include them as well.

In the discussion in July 2007, Richard agreed to include them in the
zip file, see the articles below:

,----[ <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs/15799/focus=74079> ]
| From: Richard Stallman
| Subject: Re: bad tool-bar icons in Emacs 22.1 release
| Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
| Date: 2007-07-01 00:30:33 GMT
| 
|     Probably it wasn't clear from the quoted context: The binaries on
|     <ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows> don't include DLLs required to
|     display XPM (tool bar), PNG, JPEG and other images in Emacs.
| 
| For convenience, let's put these libraries on the site.
| We should distribute the source alongside the binaries,
| and we should make sure that the binaries have whatever
| notices are required by the licenses.
`----

,----[ <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs/15799/focus=74214> ]
| From: Jason Rumney
| Subject: Re: bad tool-bar icons in Emacs 22.1 release
| Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
| Date: 2007-07-02 23:30:53 GMT
| 
| Richard Stallman wrote:
| >     Is not that a good argument for including them in the binaries then?
| >
| > It is an argument in favor of that.  But people say that would be a pain
| > for other reasons.  So maybe this is the best compromise.
| >   
| 
| I must have missed that mail - what was the pain?
`----

Bye, Reiner.
-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo---  |  PGP key available  |  http://rsteib.home.pages.de/

Re: Image DLLs for the Windows binary of Emacs 22.2

[Reiner Steib]

On Thu, Jan 31 2008, Reiner Steib wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 31 2008, Jason Rumney wrote:
>> A Windows binary is available at
>>  ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/pretest/windows/emacs-22.1.90-bin-i386.zip
> [...]
>> In addition, libxpm.dll is bundled, [...]
>
> What about the DLLs for PNG, JPEG and other image formats?  It would
> be great if you could include them as well.
>
> In the discussion in July 2007, Richard agreed to include them in the
> zip file, see the articles below:

Any comments or a decision about the other image DLLs?

> ,----[ <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs/15799/focus=74079> ]
> | From: Richard Stallman
> | Subject: Re: bad tool-bar icons in Emacs 22.1 release
> | Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
> | Date: 2007-07-01 00:30:33 GMT
> | 
> |     Probably it wasn't clear from the quoted context: The binaries on
> |     <ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows> don't include DLLs required to
> |     display XPM (tool bar), PNG, JPEG and other images in Emacs.
> | 
> | For convenience, let's put these libraries on the site.
> | We should distribute the source alongside the binaries,
> | and we should make sure that the binaries have whatever
> | notices are required by the licenses.
> `----
>
> ,----[ <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs/15799/focus=74214> ]
> | From: Jason Rumney
> | Subject: Re: bad tool-bar icons in Emacs 22.1 release
> | Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
> | Date: 2007-07-02 23:30:53 GMT
> | 
> | Richard Stallman wrote:
> | >     Is not that a good argument for including them in the binaries then?
> | >
> | > It is an argument in favor of that.  But people say that would be a pain
> | > for other reasons.  So maybe this is the best compromise.
> | >   
> | 
> | I must have missed that mail - what was the pain?
> `----

Bye, Reiner.
-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo---  |  PGP key available  |  http://rsteib.home.pages.de/

Re: Image DLLs for the Windows binary of Emacs 22.2

[Ralf Angeli]

* Reiner Steib (2008-02-10) writes:

> Any comments or a decision about the other image DLLs?

I'd also like to see them included.  Emacs on Windows currently is like
a building kit and users don't particularly like this.  Following the
AUCTeX release today we already had a user who rather wants to keep his
old installation instead of getting the official Emacs 22 package
because putting everything together was too time consuming for him.

-- 
Ralf

RE: Image DLLs for the Windows binary of Emacs 22.2

[Drew Adams]

> > Any comments or a decision about the other image DLLs?
> 
> I'd also like to see them included.  Emacs on Windows 
> currently is like a building kit and users don't particularly
> like this.  Following the AUCTeX release today we already had
> a user who rather wants to keep his old installation instead
> of getting the official Emacs 22 package because putting
> everything together was too time consuming for him.

FWIW, I second everything Ralf said.


FWIW2 - On MS Windows, users are used to just downloading and clicking a
couple times to install an app. Lennart's EmacsW32 provides that - great.
But AFAIK, users need to fiddle a bit to not include Lennart's enhancements.

That's my case - I want vanilla Emacs, but a complete vanilla Emacs - with
images, for instance. And I don't want an installer to just put Emacs where
it wants, or reassign `emacsclient' to the Emacs version that it installs,
or anything like that. [Apologies if my memory of what the EmacsW32 does is
inaccurate - it's been a while since I tried it.]

I would like for Windows users to be able to just download Emacs, put it
where they like, and be good to go, without missing basic things such as
images. Whether there is an installer (like Lennart provides) or not is not
so important, IMO, unless that is also required for some reason to be able
to have a complete working Emacs (images etc.).

As far as I am concerned (just one user), I don't mind  moving files (e.g.
executables) around and setting config (e.g. path) variables, if that's
needed to have images. But users shouldn't have to do the equivalent of
`make' or have any particular tools (e.g. cygwin) installed, just to be able
to have a workable Emacs with images. If Emacs needs particular dlls to
provide images, then they should be part of the Emacs installation.

If we do have an installer someday as part of the Emacs distribution, then
its default behavior should be to *not* install any special enhancements.
Any enhancements we think might be appropriate for use on Windows should be
available as Emacs options. (That includes automatic use of `emacslient'.)

I don't particularly want to start a discussion on this. I really just
wanted to express my feelings about lack of images out of the box for Emacs
on Windows.

Re: Image DLLs for the Windows binary of Emacs 22.2

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:28:50 -0800
> Cc: 
> 
> > > Any comments or a decision about the other image DLLs?
> > 
> > I'd also like to see them included.  Emacs on Windows 
> > currently is like a building kit and users don't particularly
> > like this.  Following the AUCTeX release today we already had
> > a user who rather wants to keep his old installation instead
> > of getting the official Emacs 22 package because putting
> > everything together was too time consuming for him.
> 
> FWIW, I second everything Ralf said.
> 
> 
> FWIW2 - On MS Windows, users are used to just downloading and clicking a
> couple times to install an app. Lennart's EmacsW32 provides that - great.
> But AFAIK, users need to fiddle a bit to not include Lennart's enhancements.

Volunteers are welcome to come on board and help Jason in packaging
and testing binary distributions of the Windows port.

Re: Image DLLs for the Windows binary of Emacs 22.2

[Ralf Angeli]

* Eli Zaretskii (2008-02-10) writes:

> Volunteers are welcome to come on board and help Jason in packaging
> and testing binary distributions of the Windows port.

You can check out how I did that by looking at
<URL:ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/auctex/emacs+auctex-src-2007-07-07.zip>.
There is a Makefile included in the ZIP archive below `emacs+auctex'
which does the assembly of the whole package and copies the libraries to
Emacs' `bin' directory in course of that.

-- 
Ralf

Re: Image DLLs for the Windows binary of Emacs 22.2

[Jason Rumney]

Reiner Steib wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31 2008, Reiner Steib wrote:
>   
>
> Any comments or a decision about the other image DLLs?
>   

Unless someone comes forward willing to do the work involved in finding 
an up to date version of each library that builds on Windows, then it 
isn't going to happen. I put in the work for the XPM library, because 
without that library the toolbar and other images built into Emacs do 
not display correctly. For other formats, I don't think the benefits 
outweigh the effort required.

PS it is not clear from the previous thread which you posted some 
messages from what the consensus was. We started talking about incuding 
libXpm (only) in Emacs CVS, and in fact Richard seems to be disagreeing 
with bundling any image libraries in the binary, and instead 
distributing them alongside Emacs which is what I was questioning, since 
I think the "other people say that would be a pain"  was actually in 
relation to including libXpm in CVS.

Re: Image DLLs for the Windows binary of Emacs 22.2

[Jason Rumney]

Ralf Angeli wrote:
> You can check out how I did that by looking at
> <URL:ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/auctex/emacs+auctex-src-2007-07-07.zip>.
> There is a Makefile included in the ZIP archive below `emacs+auctex'
> which does the assembly of the whole package and copies the libraries to
> Emacs' `bin' directory in course of that.
>   

Can the libraries be built from the source that is included? Does it 
require proprietary tools (ie MSVC)? Are the image libraries old 
versions that are full of known security vulnerabilities?

I don't think people cheering from the sidelines appreciate what a 
minefield the image libraries on Windows are.

Re: Image DLLs for the Windows binary of Emacs 22.2

[Ralf Angeli]

* Jason Rumney (2008-02-10) writes:

> Can the libraries be built from the source that is included?

Unfortunately not, but there is a link in the release notes to the place
where the sources can be obtained.

> Does it 
> require proprietary tools (ie MSVC)? Are the image libraries old 
> versions that are full of known security vulnerabilities?

They were up-to-date at the time the package was prepared.  And before
last July the package was updated on a regular base with then up-to-date
libraries.

> I don't think people cheering from the sidelines appreciate what a 
> minefield the image libraries on Windows are.

Well, the current situation is a PITA for the Windows users.  Would
perhaps an installer fetching the libraries from appropriate sources be
an alternative?

-- 
Ralf

Re: Image DLLs for the Windows binary of Emacs 22.2

[Lennart Borgman (gmail)]

Jason Rumney wrote:
> Reiner Steib wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 31 2008, Reiner Steib wrote:
>>  
>> Any comments or a decision about the other image DLLs?
>>   
> 
> Unless someone comes forward willing to do the work involved in finding 
> an up to date version of each library that builds on Windows, then it 
> isn't going to happen. I put in the work for the XPM library, because 
> without that library the toolbar and other images built into Emacs do 
> not display correctly. For other formats, I don't think the benefits 
> outweigh the effort required.


AFAIR we decided to not include those libraries because if we did we 
would have to repackage the distribution if new libraries were released 
because of security problems. But I have to keep track of the image 
libraries for EmacsW32 so I can give some input about them.

But since someone mentioned here again that there are users that find it 
too much work to put everything together to get Emacs working on w32 
then maybe something like I package together in Emacs+EmacsW32 could be 
used?

Re: Image DLLs for the Windows binary of Emacs 22.2

[Reiner Steib]

On Sun, Feb 10 2008, Jason Rumney wrote:

> Reiner Steib wrote:
>> Any comments or a decision about the other image DLLs?
>
> Unless someone comes forward willing to do the work involved in
> finding an up to date version of each library that builds on
> Windows, then it isn't going to happen. I put in the work for the
> XPM library, because without that library the toolbar and other
> images built into Emacs do not display correctly.

Thanks a lot for your work on this.

> For other formats, I don't think the benefits outweigh the effort
> required.

And thanks for the clarification as well.

> PS it is not clear from the previous thread which you posted some messages
> from what the consensus was. We started talking about incuding libXpm (only)
> in Emacs CVS, and in fact Richard seems to be disagreeing with bundling any
> image libraries in the binary, 

Could you please point me to this message?

> and instead distributing them alongside Emacs which is what I was
> questioning, since I think the "other people say that would be a
> pain" was actually in relation to including libXpm in CVS.

I think this was some misunderstanding.

My understanding is...

- It is okay to include the image DLLs in the emacs-22.*-bin-i386.zip
  file (i.e. as emacs/bin/*.dll when unpacked) [1] if...

  - they are free software [2]

  - we make sure that the binaries (DLLs) have whatever notices are
    required by their licenses [3]

  - we distribute the source of the DLLs alongside [3], i.e. at the
    same download directory as emacs-22.*-bin-i386.zip

Bye, Reiner.

[1]
,----[ http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/74093 ]
| From: Reiner Steib
| Date: 2007-07-01 09:03:52 GMT
| 
| On Sun, Jul 01 2007, Richard Stallman wrote:
| 
| >     Probably it wasn't clear from the quoted context: The binaries on
| >     <ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows> don't include DLLs required to
| >     display XPM (tool bar), PNG, JPEG and other images in Emacs.
| >
| > For convenience, let's put these libraries on the site.
| 
| It would be preferable to include the libraries in the zip archive in
| the right directory (emacs-22.1/bin/ (?), along with some
| README.image-libs file?).
`----

Richard responded to this:

,----[ http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/74124 ]
| That sounds convenient for the users.
`----

[2] 
,----[ http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs/15833 ]
| From: Richard Stallman
| To: Reiner Steib
| Cc: lennart.borgman.073[...], bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
| Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 17:00:20 -0400
| Message-ID: <E1HxUWK-00006A-IP@fencepost.gnu.org>
| 
|     If there's no problem WRT license issues, I think it would make much
|     sense to include the image support DLLs in the official Emacs
|     distribution for windows.
| 
| Are these libraries free software?
| If so, I don't mind including them.
`----

[3] 
,----[ http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/74079 ]
| For convenience, let's put these libraries on the site.
| We should distribute the source alongside the binaries,
| and we should make sure that the binaries have whatever
| notices are required by the licenses.
`----
-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo---  |  PGP key available  |  http://rsteib.home.pages.de/

Re: Image DLLs for the Windows binary of Emacs 22.2

[Jason Rumney]

Reiner Steib wrote:
> Could you please point me to this message?
>
>   

It was quoted in your previous mail...

,----[ <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs/15799/focus=74214> ]
> | From: Jason Rumney
> | Subject: Re: bad tool-bar icons in Emacs 22.1 release
> | Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
> | Date: 2007-07-02 23:30:53 GMT
> | 
> | Richard Stallman wrote:
> | >     Is not that a good argument for including them in the binaries then?
> | >
> | > It is an argument in favor of that.  But people say that would be a pain
> | > for other reasons.  So maybe this is the best compromise.
> | >   
> | 
> | I must have missed that mail - what was the pain?

Re: Image DLLs for the Windows binary of Emacs 22.2

[Reiner Steib]

On Sun, Feb 10 2008, Jason Rumney wrote:

> Reiner Steib wrote:

>>> Richard seems to be disagreeing with bundling any image libraries
>>> in the binary,
>> Could you please point me to this message?
>
> It was quoted in your previous mail...
>
> ,----[ <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs/15799/focus=74214> ]
>> | From: Jason Rumney
>> | Subject: Re: bad tool-bar icons in Emacs 22.1 release
>> | Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
>> | Date: 2007-07-02 23:30:53 GMT
>> | | Richard Stallman wrote:
>> | >     Is not that a good argument for including them in the binaries then?
>> | >
>> | > It is an argument in favor of that.  But people say that would be a pain
>> | > for other reasons.  So maybe this is the best compromise.
>> | >   | | I must have missed that mail - what was the pain?

I don't recall (and can't find) anything else that could be meant
beside the (misunderstanding) to include the libXpm sources in Emacs
CVS.

Bye, Reiner.
-- 
       ,,,
      (o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo---  |  PGP key available  |  http://rsteib.home.pages.de/

Re: Image DLLs for the Windows binary of Emacs 22.2

[Jason Rumney]

Lennart Borgman (gmail) wrote
> AFAIR we decided to not include those libraries because if we did we 
> would have to repackage the distribution if new libraries were 
> released because of security problems. But I have to keep track of the 
> image libraries for EmacsW32 so I can give some input about them.

That was one of several factors that make the task much more difficult 
that it initially seems.

I have made a change to nt/addpm.c, which adds the GTK 2.0 installation 
directory to the DLL search path for Emacs if GTK 2.0 is installed. This 
won't help everyone, but we might as well use the image libraries from 
there (JPEG, PNG and TIFF) if it is installed. The answer to queries 
about image support on Windows then becomes much simpler - install GTK 
and re-run addpm, rather than installing multiple individual libraries 
and modifying the PATH manually.