X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From:	Rugxulo <rugxulo AT gmail DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Difficulties compiling emacs with gcc 4.6.2
Date:	Fri, 27 Apr 2012 20:29:35 -0700 (PDT)
Organization:	http://groups.google.com
Lines:	38
Message-ID:	<9cd6f1d7-ec21-431c-8b7e-44072b4baf02@f27g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
References:	<201204090011 DOT 41565 DOT juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de> <201204212330 DOT 14769 DOT juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de>
	<83d370h41v DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <201204251935 DOT 54557 DOT juan DOT guerrero AT gmx DOT de>
	<83zk9zemcd DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <8e234c5c-6499-438e-af82-a27acc6430d6 AT m13g2000yqi DOT googlegroups DOT com>
	<83wr53edd7 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <76d604cb-2559-414c-95e5-06504006d6af AT c4g2000yqj DOT googlegroups DOT com>
	<83bomeaofq DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <6e2013e9-bc74-488f-b6a2-97944d4079c6 AT r9g2000yqd DOT googlegroups DOT com>
	<83y5phhdsq DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	65.13.115.246
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	posting.google.com 1335584231 29836 127.0.0.1 (28 Apr 2012 03:37:11 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	groups-abuse AT google DOT com
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Sat, 28 Apr 2012 03:37:11 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To:	groups-abuse AT google DOT com
Injection-Info:	f27g2000yqc.googlegroups.com; posting-host=65.13.115.246; posting-account=p5rsXQoAAAB8KPnVlgg9E_vlm2dvVhfO
User-Agent:	G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.16
	(KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/10.0.630.0 Safari/534.16,gzip(gfe)
Bytes:	3212
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id q3S3j1T7001282
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Hi,

On Apr 27, 1:47 am, Eli Zaretskii <e DOT  DOT  DOT  AT gnu DOT org> wrote:
> > From: Rugxulo <rugx DOT  DOT  DOT  AT gmail DOT com>
> > Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 16:43:20 -0700 (PDT)
>
> > If it were me, I'd ask the Windows dudes to help us, but I don't know
> > if they're sympathetic (and I heavily doubt it).
>
> Guess who are "the Windows dudes" these days ;-)

Yeah, I remember you said something vaguely like that once, and I was
(barely) surprised. You still use good ol' XP, right? Is that all for
"bidi" support or whatever? I guess that makes sense.

(It's not that Windows is bad, just way overblown. Too many
technologies, and I can't pretend to care.)

> The existence of the DJGPP port imposes certain restrictions on what
> the Emacs developers can and cannot do.  One issue is to prevent file
> names from clashing in the 8+3 namespace, so that the release tarballs
> could be unpacked on plain DOS filesystems.

I'm on the fence. They bundle too much with the tarball already, but
at least it's easier to find everything. Though I still say DOSLFN
would solve this "problem" in a pinch.

> > However, from a quick search, it seems the big problem to them is 8.3
> > filenames. I know you probably wouldn't like the idea, but I'd rather
> > rely on DOSLFN (or, if hating VFAT, StarLFN) instead of dropping the
> > port entirely.
>
> Requiring a Windows platform for building will probably be the first
> step, yes.

I don't see how you have to require Windows here, just DOSLFN (or
StarLFN or similar). You could just as easily require DOSEMU or
VirtualBox + FreeDOS + DOSLFN or whatever.

- Raw text -